English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Personally, I think they certainly should be allowed into the priesthood. The "men-only" status was a product of a men-dominated culture 2000 years ago, when women were often treated in a second-class manner, supposed to only be submissive to their husbands and make more Catholics. Much of this mindset is still embraced by the church (wedding vows, etc..). Women need to be treated equally by the church, but it seems that the male-dominated hierarchy wants to continue its "good-ol'-boy" mentality with regards to this important issue. The church is in dire need of priests and women have always been extremely active in church matters and activities. In my opinion, the time has come for a change.

2007-06-25 08:33:37 · 9 answers · asked by Bemarian 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Second-class citizens with regards to their ability to achieve the same sociatal staus as men...

Scripture was also established during the same male-dominated times.

2007-06-25 08:43:32 · update #1

9 answers

As far as I know, the male priesthood is a tradition, not a doctrine of the Catholic Church. You have acurately given the reasons for the all male priesthood.

One day, women may be allowed into the priesthood, but it will not happen any time soon. The all male priesthood is a 2000 year old tradition that will be very hard to change. The Church does not bend to the pressure of popular opinion.

2007-06-25 08:39:29 · answer #1 · answered by Sldgman 7 · 3 2

No, women should NOT be allowed to become Catholic priests. Did Jesus call any women when He named his 12 apostles?

I get very tired of the argument that because women can't be priests, we are somehow second-class citizens in the Church. Nothing could be further from the truth. Afterall, the Father chose a woman to give birth to His Son, the Messiah, the Savior of the World.

Women are able to serve in all kinds of capacities within the Church. The opportunities are endless. Personally I feel myself overwhelmed sometimes with all the possibilities that face me today as a woman in the Roman Catholic Church.

2007-06-25 08:44:13 · answer #2 · answered by Faustina 4 · 2 2

*Is Catholic*

First you would call them PRIESTESSES not priests. Please use the right language.

To answer your question, no I do not, they should not, and they cannot.


EverydayCatholic above is incorrect.

It is a Catholic doctrine that
1.) Christ did not women 'priests'
2.) There never were women 'priests'
3.) The Church has no power to make women 'priests' now or in the future.

Please consult
Inter Insigniores
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6interi.htm
and
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2ORDIN.HTM

You should also read the following by then Card. Ratzinger
http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/teach/ordisace2.htm
http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/teach/ordisace3.htm

LET CARD RATZINGER now Pope Benedict XVI have the last word
This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium




ps. If you want women "priestesses" be a protestant.

2007-06-25 12:49:27 · answer #3 · answered by Liet Kynes 5 · 1 2

Absolutely not.
This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says,
"Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination." The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible." CCC 1577

2007-06-25 08:38:44 · answer #4 · answered by Maurus B. 3 · 2 2

I'm sure that accuding the Church of 2,000 years of male chauvinism makes you feel better, but that in and of itself does not help advance the cause of women priesthood.

Rather than rely on secular society's grossly negligent misunderstandings of Catholic Doctrine, would it not be better to examine the Church's belief, and discover WHY the priesthood is meant for men only?

Before we get to that, do not make the mistake of assuming I can be a priest simply due to the fact I am a man. It doesn't work that way.

We're all called to live some form of consecrated life. I was called to the married life. Others are called to be single. Still, a select few are called to the clergy.

Becoming a Catholic Clergyman is not about a man exercising a "right". It's about accepting a God-given privilege. God decides who is given this privilege, not us.

Women in the Priesthood
Gen. 3:15; Luke 1:26-55; John 19:26; Rev. 12:1- Mary is God's greatest creation, was the closest person to Jesus, and yet Jesus did not choose her to become a priest. God chose only men to be priests to reflect the complimentarity of the sexes. Just as the man (the royal priest) gives natural life to the woman in the marital covenant, the ministerial priest gives supernatural life in the New Covenant sacraments.

Judges 17:10; 18:19 – fatherhood and priesthood are synonymous terms. Micah says, “Stay with me, and be to me a father and a priest.” Fathers/priests give life, and mothers receive and nurture life. This reflects God our Father who gives the life of grace through the Priesthood of His Divine Son, and Mother Church who receives the life of grace and nourishes her children. In summary, women cannot be priests because women cannot be fathers.

Mark 16:9; Luke 7: 37-50; John 8:3-11 - Jesus allowed women to uniquely join in His mission, exalting them above cultural norms. His decision not to ordain women had nothing to do with culture. The Gospel writers are also clear that women participated in Jesus' ministry and, unlike men, never betrayed Jesus. Women have always been held with the highest regard in the Church (e.g., the Church's greatest saint and model of faith is a woman; the Church's constant teaching on the dignity of motherhood; the Church's understanding of humanity as being the Bride united to Christ, etc.).

Mark 14:17,20; Luke 22:14 - the language "the twelve" and "apostles" shows Jesus commissioned the Eucharistic priesthood by giving holy orders only to men.

Gen. 14:10; Heb. 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:15,17 - Jesus, the Son of God, is both priest and King after the priest-king Melchizedek. Jesus' priesthood embodies both Kingship and Sonship.

Gen. 22:9-13 - as foreshadowed, God chose our redemption to be secured by the sacrificial love that the Son gives to the Father.

Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19 - because the priest acts in persona Christi in the offering to the Father, the priest cannot be a woman.

Mark 3:13 - Jesus selected the apostles "as He desired," according to His will, and not according to the demands of His culture. Because Jesus acted according to His will which was perfectly united to that of the Father, one cannot criticize Jesus' selection of men to be His priests without criticizing God.

John 20:22 - Jesus only breathed on the male apostles, the first bishops, giving them the authority to forgive and retain sins. In fact, the male priesthood of Christianity was a distinction from the priestesses of paganism that existed during these times. A female priesthood would be a reversion to non-Christian practices. The sacred tradition of a male priesthood has existed uncompromised in the Church for 2,000 years.

1 Cor. 14:34-35 - Paul says a woman is not permitted to preach the word of God in the Church. It has always been the tradition of the Church for the priest or deacon alone (an ordained male) to read and preach the Gospel.

1 Tim. 2:12 - Paul also says that a woman is not permitted to hold teaching authority in the Church. Can you imagine how much Mary, the Mother of God, would have been able to teach Christians about Jesus her Son in the Church? Yet, she was not permitted to hold such teaching authority in the Church.

Rom. 16:1-2 - while many Protestants point to this verse denounce the Church's tradition of a male priesthood, deaconesses, like Phoebe, were helpers to the priests (for example, preparing women for naked baptism so as to prevent scandal). But these helpers were never ordained.

Luke 2:36-37 - prophetesses, like Anna, were women who consecrated themselves to religious life, but were not ordained.

Isaiah 3:12 – Isaiah complains that the priests of ancient Israel were having their authority usurped by women, and this was at the height of Israel’s covenant apostasy.

2007-06-26 02:48:34 · answer #5 · answered by Daver 7 · 0 0

I am guessing the the answer that suggests women have no right preaching would be 1 Corintians 14-15 :"33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40 Let all things be done decently and in order.
15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God."

I included Corinthians 15, because even in this Paul does not want to include the women who were the first to see the Resurrected Jesus. Paul became a disciple later, did not see first hand the way Jesus treated the women...with respect, dignity and honor. He appreciated their intelligence and spoke with them. The Church is still of Paul's mindset, even though the cultures have progressed and recognize that women are equals...something that was not done in the time of Jesus. Women should have the right to be active full members of the Church. It is the male dominated heirarchy that is still archaic in its viewpoint. But, there are many women who have grown up with the concept that women cannot be priests and are afraid to make that leap of faith forward that this IS what the Church should be doing. I think Jesus would look at the heirachy of the Church today with the same view as he had of the Pharisees..."blind guides" (Matthew 23)

BTW, women most likely were not chosen in the twelve because of the social life at that time...it had nothing to do with their capabilities. It definately would not have been viewed as proper for women to travel with Jesus in that manner.

2007-06-25 09:57:02 · answer #6 · answered by guppy137 4 · 0 0

Daver couldn't be more wrong in his citation of Romans.

There was no feminine form to the office of deacon for several centuries after Paul's death. You were either a deacon or you weren't.

Paul's definition of a deacon, outlined in Timothy, fits the role of what a priest does today.

Further, Paul sent Phoebe to act as deacon over the Christian congregation of Rome, asking them to do what she required of them. If he didn't differentiate the role of deacon and deaconess in his writings, we have to assume that she indeed was intended to act as deacon of Rome. Otherwise, why exactly would he send a woman to act as deacon in the ancient world's most important city if she didn't approve of women in positions of authority?

In short, Paul held contradictory views on the position of women in the pulpit. But that doesn't mean he excluded them as evidenced by Phoebe.

2007-06-26 08:45:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

First off, women were not second class citizens. The work women did was known to be just as important. Women were not as able to do the hard labor so they would harvest, plant small crops, raise the kids, and do the house work that was NEEDED to be done.

Secondly, it says in the bible that women should not become preachers.

I do not think I would want to attend a mass being said by a female preist.

2007-06-25 08:38:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

No, no one should be a catholic priest

2007-06-25 08:50:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers