Rcia question that came up about ordination of woman in the priesthood

I am a sponser for my fiance in the RCIA class and our discussion tonight was on Holy Orders. A question that rose that us Catholics need a better response on to defend the catholic stance was this…Is it possible for the Magisterium to allow for woman to be ordained as priest? We had just previously discussed how celibacy in the priesthood was a DISCIPLINE and that it COULD be changed by the Church, but very in likely. And that question up above was posted, whether the ordination of woman is a sound doctrine that the Church cannot change WHATSOEVER or is a just a discipline that COULD be changed but highly unlikely like the celibacy thing. Than this student went on to state this scriptural verse saying that it supports woman being Apostles or AKA a priest or bishop. I would like a well thought out Catholic response using scripture and the magisteriums encylicals pertaining to this matter please so I can pass on to our RCIA class to help so they can better understand the Catholic stance! Thanks for your time and God bless!

Below is her scripture verse she uses to show woman being ordained as apostles,

Romans 16:7 “Greet Andronicus and Junia,[c] my kinsmen and my(F) fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles,[d] and they were in Christ before me.”

First of all, Romans 16:7 does not even remotely qualify as a scriptural basis for the ordination of women. Just because they were “well known” to the Apostles, does not mean that they were bishops or presbyters. In any case, they were both men, so how two men could be held as an example for ordaining women is beyond me.

I suggest you print a copy of Pope John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter *Ordinatio Sacerdotalis *which explains this matter most clearly.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Also, Pope Paul IV’s declaration Inter Insigniores
papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6interi.htm

Simply put NO! women will never be ordained as Priests (ess)

That is a settled issue. See Father’s references above.

Anyone telling you differently of suggesting that it might someday come to pass is wrong. You should refer them to their Local Bishop immediately.

Remember that the person who said it is also a potential convert, that person is still learning.

I should have also mentioned Pope John Paul’s Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem
On the Dignity and Vocation of Women, because it’s important to put the disciplinary documents mentioned above into the pastoral context explained in this Apostolic Letter.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

tks for sharing your experience here. It’s quite well if some illustrations were following here. http://www.*********.com/img/4713/n09x0302vnsn/clear.gif

Remember that Christ picked 12 men as Apostles not a woman in the group. Women have a place in the Church just not as Priests.God Bless:thumbsup:

The catholic church can and does ordain married men to the priesthood! They just all happen to be priests in the eastern churches. This is a concrete demonstration of the way in which this is a discipline in the latin church, not a doctrine. Similarly, a married Anglican priest is (sometimes) allowed to be ordained a catholic priest upon conversion to catholicism even in the latin rite.

But never has a woman Anglican priest converted to catholicism and been ordained to the catholic priesthood. Not because of a discipline, but because catholicism believes it cannot be done. Jesus didn’t do it in spite of having excellent candidates. Do we really think we know better? Apparently some people DO think that!

Stick with the final word of the Holy Father.

So are some Methodists. Rev. Fr. Scott Medlock, for one.

The only ordination the church has ever allowed women is deaconess; the order of deaconess has not been in use in the Catholic church for many centuries.

(even then, the rules for admission were pretty tough… age 60, either a virgin or widow of a priest.)

And it’s not even clear if that ordination was considered to have been equivalent to a deacon; many believe it was not. A deaconess is not, therefore, likely to be a female deacon, tho some are traditionally shown bearing the censer.

Deaconesses were never ordained anyway. Although the word might have been used loosely to describe the ceremony, it was never considered an ordination in the sense that we now use the word. The service of installing a deaconess always occured outside the sanctuary, with the deaconess never going into the sanctuary, neither during the ceremony, nor afterwards. This is different from ordinations, when the first ordination (whatever order that might have been at that time/place) occured outside the sanctuary, and then the newly-ordained was brought into the sanctuary for the first time; and subsequent ordinations occured within it.

Deaconesses were never ordained anyway. Although the word might have been used loosely to describe the ceremony, it was never considered an ordination in the sense that we now use the word…The service of installing a deaconess always occured outside the sanctuary, with the deaconess never going into the sanctuary, neither during the ceremony, nor afterwards. This is different from ordinations, when the first ordination (whatever order that might have been at that time/place) occured outside the sanctuary, and then the newly-ordained was brought into the sanctuary for the first time; and subsequent ordinations occured within it.

This is not true, Fr. David, at least in the Byzantine tradition.

The link to the rite can be given here.

anastasis.org.uk/woman_deacon.htm

I will point out the following things, which are for the benefit of those not familiar with Byzantine liturgical practices.

  1. The very name of the rite is CHEIRTONIA, which is used only for the major orders, and not CHEIROTHESIA, which is used for the minor orders of Reader and Subdeacon, and various other blessings.

  2. It must be conferred during the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, unlike that of the minor orders, which can be done outside of it. Furthermore, it takes place INSIDE the Sanctuary, uline the minor orders, which are always done ouside it–unlike the major orders of Deacon, Presbyter, and Bishop, which take place inside the sanctuary.

  3. The initial prayer “The Divine Grace which heals that which is infirm…” is the same as the initial prayer of ordaining a Deacon, Presbyter, or Bishop. In fact, it is in this prayer that the imposition of hands (noticeably missing in Reader and Subdeacon) is done.

  4. The rite has many prayers that are identical with (others being parallel to) that of the ordination of a male deacon.

  5. The new Deaconess is vested with the orarion–Deacon’s stole.

  6. The new Deaconess, like a newly-ordained Deacon, replaces the Chalice on the Altar after Communion of the faithful, thus clearly demonstrating that this rite DOES take place in the Sanctuary.

while you can certainly argue for the allowance of female Deacons… and we currently DO allow female alter servers and … uh… (forgive if the term is wrong) extraordinary ministers (that is the folks that help the priest to administer the sacraments.

there has never been a female priest. wont be, and the Pope (several of them) have claimed that it is not in possibility.

the quote has no reference to female priests. it refers to men, first of all… but even the women who Paul refers to in various letters are referred to as, at most, elders in the church.
also… the assorted women, (Martha, Mary, etc) had been followers of Christ longer than Paul… who had not even MET Christ until his experience on teh road… so they would be his elders in teh church… they would be people who had met the Apostles and Christ himself, but they were NOT Apostles… they were not appointed to the Priesthood .

married priests are possible. in fact if you convert as a priest from, say, Episcopalian and you are married, you may become a married Catholic priest. Historically there have been married priests, but they were often barred from rising above “parish priest” in the orders…

Women and the Priesthood

Why can’t women be priests?

Why is there so much talk of women’s ordination?

Why Can’t Women Be Priests?

All I can say is that that is not consistent with what I’ve read in every other (reliable) source about the office of deaconess.

The council of Nicea itself reminds us that deaconesses were in fact not numbered among the clergy.

The webpage refers to “women deacons” and that in itself makes me suspect as to the authenticity of the text.

Cluny’s is correct for the Byzantine tradition. However, ceremonies and duties for deaconess varied among rites - in some, they were like the major orders and in orders more akin to those of the minor orders. One book which goes into this but makes an argument against deaconesses receiving a major order is Martimort’s “Deaconesses”. It has been criticized in some areas, and a few of his proofs are not airtight, but it is a good overview among the different rites of the Church.

KNOWN to the apostles, but she WASNT an apostle. The long & the short of this one both in scripture & the CCC is that Jesus didn’t have female priests or apostles, so there arent any today. PLENTY of disciples, but none in the priesthood. This one is quite simple. That bit from Romans has nothing to do with female priests or even apostle-status. Mary was well known to the apostles, as was Mary Magdeline, and Elizabeth, but none of them were apostles or priests.

The current teaching of the Catholic Church is that the Church has no right or ability to ordain women to the priesthood. Others have provided links to the applicable teachings regarding this. Familiarizing yourself (and others interested) with these references might be helpful.

The question of the Diaconate is much more open to future changes, there’s no authoritative restriction on whether or not in the future women could possibly be ordained deacons. There are no Scriptural restrictions on this.

The Church does not have the right to ordain women. In the early Church women were allowed to be deaconesses, but that was for practical reasons. The Catechumens in the early church were baptized NAKED and then clothed in white garments. Overtime, the church stopped baptizing people naked and so there was no need for deaconesses anymore.

The Council of Nicea counted women deacons among the laity rather than the ordained clergy(Cannon 19).

In 2002, the International Theological Commission studied the matter and decided: That Female deacons did not have all the responsibilities that priests or male deacons had. The did not perform liturgical actions as such, but assisted with baptisms and performed other rites of the Church. (Catholic Bible Dictionary, Hahn, Scott,ed.; Doubleday Religion. pg 202)
In the Catholic Church there are “disciplines” and “doctrines” disciplines can be changed(ie Married clergy). Doctrines cannot change (ie Mary is the Mother of God).
CC

Do you have a reference for that? I rather doubt that the International Theological Commissoin would have even said that there were female deacons–deaconesses yes, but never female deacons.

Here’s their page on the Vatican website
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_index.htm
I was unable to find any reference to what you’re talking about, but there isn’t much there on the webpage to begin with.

PS: By “reference” I mean something we can look at on the web–I don’t have the book you cited.

How could it be “correct” if the Byzantime tradition is not using the installation rite that was referenced, and the ancient rites that we do have are only fragments?

It is one thing to find a “rite of ordination” so-called on a webpage, but if such a rite doees not exist in praxis, how can it be considered “correct”?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.