Vatican opposes female clergy anywhere, gives reasons from Bible

Associated Press ^ | Saturday, July 8, 2006 | Richard N. Ostling

[WestTexasWend]

By coincidence, a potentially historic speech about women that received little media fanfare was made two weeks before America's Episcopal Church elected Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as its leader, the first female to head a branch of the international Anglican Communion.

The speaker was Cardinal Walter Kasper, the Vatican's top official on relations with non-Catholic Christians, addressing a private session with the Church of England's bishops and certain women priests.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, spiritual leader of the 77 million Anglicans, invited Kasper to discuss the English church's projected move to allow women bishops. To date, only the United States, Canada and New Zealand have female Anglican bishops.

Official Catholic and Anglican negotiators have spent four decades working toward shared Communion and full recognition of each other's clergy and doctrine. Mincing no words, Kasper said that goal of restoring full relations "would realistically no longer exist" if Anglicanism's mother church in England consecrates women bishops.

"The shared partaking of the one Lord's table, which we long for so earnestly, would disappear into the far and ultimately unreachable distance. Instead of moving towards one another, we would coexist alongside one another," Kasper warned, though some cooperation would continue.

In the New Testament and throughout church history, Kasper explained, bishops have been "the sign and the instrument of unity" for local dioceses and Christianity worldwide. Thus, women bishops would be far more damaging than England's women priests.

This centrality of bishops also explains why within world Anglicanism there's far more upset about U.S. Episcopalians' consecration of an openly gay bishop than earlier ordinations of gay priests. But Kasper didn't repeat Rome's equally fervent opposition to gay clergy.

The cardinal said women bishops should be elevated only after "overwhelming consensus" is reached with Catholicism and like-minded Eastern Orthodoxy.

Anglicans cannot assume Catholicism will someday drop objections to female priests and bishops, Kasper said. "The Catholic Church is convinced that she has no right to do so."

Why? Casual Western onlookers might suppose Catholicism's stance is simple gender prejudice, but Kasper cited theological convictions that some Anglicans share.

The Vatican first explained its opposition to women priests in 1975 after then-Archbishop of Canterbury Donald Coggan notified Pope Paul VI that Anglicans overall saw "no fundamental objections in principle" to female clergy. That year, the Anglican Church of Canada authorized women priests, followed by U.S. Episcopalians in 1976.

Pope Paul's 1975 reply to Coggan said the gender ban honors "the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held" this fits "God's plan for his church."

That established basic points which were elaborated in a 1976 declaration from the Vatican's doctrine office and a 1994 apostolic letter from Pope John Paul II.

Before Paul's 1975 letter, Rome's Pontifical Biblical Commission reportedly voted 12-5 to advise privately, "It does not seem that the New Testament by itself alone will permit us to settle in a clear way" whether to permit female priests.

The commission examined numerous Bible passages. Yes, Jesus' 12 apostles were male, it said, and there's no New Testament evidence of women serving explicit priestly functions. However, women filled leadership posts and enjoyed high status. One was even considered an "apostle" if Junio or Junias (Romans 16:7) was female.

Protestants who forbid women clergy don't usually cite Jesus' choice of male apostles but rather 1 Timothy 2:12 ("I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent"). The Pontifical Commission said this scripture perhaps referred "only to certain concrete situations and abuses," not all women anytime and everywhere.

[dollars_for_dogma]

In scripture, it's crystal clear that the church has NO role in salvation...

Believe this rubbish and you can follow the Iscool right

into the "smoking section."

[Barnacle]

Did not Constantine found the Catholic Church?

Ahh no. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus.

But, He went back to his home in Heaven and left Peter in charge. He was the first pope. There has been a continuous lineage of popes even since, unless of course if you care to call attention to that four year interval where we were being fed to lions for the general entertainment of the public.

[Iscool]

Show us some scripture where the church saves people...

[dollars_for_dogma]

Show us some scripture where the church saves people...

I've been through this charade with you before and

I'm not playing your game anymore...

The protestants are the ones with the heretical beliefs,

you prove that there is no Salvation through the

Catholic Church.

Protestant, heretic, it means the same thing:

"one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church."

[the invisib1e hand]

Casual Western onlookers might suppose Catholicism's stance is simple gender prejudice

While I guess I'm thankful that this assumption is apparently rebutted in this piece, I can't but question it to begin with. Why would "casual Western onlookers" suppose it's "gender prejudice?" Why would this oracle (AP) be making such a statement? Why on earth would the Church be engaging in "simple gender prejudice?" Why is such an assertion even part of the debate at all? It's akin to making the remark, "you might assume that medical professionals go home and do experiments on their children, but actually...." -- it is such a riduculous attempt at fabricating context; it is certainly not the sort of remark you'd be hearing from a rational person. From a paranoid and delusional one, perhaps, but not a "casual Western" one.

[NYer]

Isn't there a shrine devoted to St. Charbel in one of our midwestern states (Ohio, perhaps)?

There are several parishes named for St. Charbel but the shrine in Ohio is dedicated to Our Lady of Lebanon.

The crowning point of the shrine is the full size replica of the Our Lady of Lebanon statute in Harissa, Lebanon.  The tower, weighing some 3700 tons, is 50 feet high with a 4 1/2 foot, 2 ton pedestal on top.  Atop the pedestal, made out of North Carolina pink granite is the 12 foot, 7 1/2 ton statue of Our Lady of Lebanon.  The wrapping staircase is 64 steps long, one step for each prayer of the rosary. 

According to the shrine's history, when the workmen were using a crane to lift the statue into place atop the pedestal, a large cloud overhead cycled through a rainbow of colors, which even the non-Catholic workers on the site took as a sign of divine approval of the shrine.

Looking down from the statute towards the street, you see a landscaped scene of two hearts, an M for Mary and a cross.

Closer to the scene, you'll notice the heart on the left represents the Sacred Heart of Christ with the crown of thorns of the passion and the heart on the right represents, with the sword piercing it, the sorrowful heart of the Virgin Mary at Calvary.

The Ohio shrine is modeled after the original one in Harissa, Lebanon, at the patriarchal see of the Maronite Catholic Church.

[Iscool]

Protestant, heretic, it means the same thing:

"one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church."

And in times past, you would have burned my Bible and run me thru with a sword or burned me at the stake...

Once again:
Joh 5:39 Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

It's your choice, your church's dogma, or the Word of God...

[livius]

Thank you! That's the one I was thinking of - when I lived in PA, years ago, one of our Byzantine rite parishes made a pilgrimage to this shrine. I couldn't go, unfortunately (small children at home!).

[NYer]

Nonsense...'If' the Pope has been filled with the Holy Spirit, he has no more of a measure of the Holy Spirit than I or other Christians have ...

Jesus called His heavenly Father Abba, the Hebrew and Aramaic word for papa or daddy, a child’s way of referring to his own father.

The pope is the visible head of the Catholic Church. Pope comes from the Greek pappas, a child’s word for “father,” also more accurately papa or daddy, because his authority is supreme, and because his authority is as the Church’s loving father, after the relationship between Christ and His Father in heaven.

Jesus told his prodigal son Peter, Jn 21:15 “Feed My lambs  Tend My sheep  Feed My sheep.” Jesus had earlier said, Jn 10:11 “I am the good shepherd.” By directing that Peter become the good shepherd, Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom, ordaining his office and primacy. Peter became Christ’s vicar, or personal representative, on earth. Peter’s prestige as the head apostle was so great that people Acts 5:15 “ carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and pallets, that as Peter came by at least his shadow might fall on some of them.”

Each pope is the successor of Peter, and therefore speaks with Christ’s own authority as His vicar on earth. Jesus said, Jn 8:28 “I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me.” So, too, the Church does nothing on its own authority, but speaks only as the pope teaches and directs.

Jesus told His apostles, and by extension their successors, Mt 10:40 “He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me.” That authority has crossed the centuries in a continuing line of apostolic succession. Every Catholic bishop, priest, and deacon was ordained by a bishop who was ordained by a bishop who was ordained by a bishop  who was personally ordained by Jesus Himself.

”Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who accept all the means of salvation given to the Church  through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops.”

[NYer]

So when presented with a scripture that says to do this and when presented with the Pope that says to do that instead, who are you going to follow?

The Catholic Church from the very beginning accepted 73 books, 46 written before Christ’s arrival for the Israelite people and 27 written after Christ’s arrival for the Christian faithful, as divinely inspired. These books are gathered together into one book called The Bible, or Holy Scripture.

So where did the Bible come from?

St. Athanasius in his Festal Letter, § 39, in 367 AD, published a list of books suitable for reading during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as a regional canon for the Eastern Church.

Pope St. Damasus I in 382 AD approved the work of the first Council of Constantinople, accepting St. Athanasius’ list as divinely inspired, and indicated that if any bishop used a list of books inconsistent with the Roman canon he would need a convincing explanation. Then the Council of Hippo, a regional council for some of the bishops in the Diocese of Africa, in 393 AD reaffirmed The Decree of Damasus. The third Council of Carthage was far more authoritative than the Council of Hippo. The Diocese of Africa then had its see at Carthage, so Carthage had authority to speak for all of the northwest African bishops. The Council of Carthage in 397 AD also reaffirmed The Decree of Damasus. Carthage, unlike Hippo, sent its decisions to Rome for ratification. Pope St. Boniface I (418-422) ratified the decision and declared the canon settled for the Western Patriarchate. He also sent the decision to the Eastern patriarchs in Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. At that point, the Catholic Canon of Sacred Scripture was informally accepted worldwide. The Fourth Council of Carthage in 419 reaffirmed Pope St. Boniface. The Council of Nicea II in 787 ratified the same canon as authoritative for the Eastern Churches. Finally, the Council of Trent, a worldwide Ecumenical Council, formally proclaimed the Catholic Canon of Sacred Scripture in 1546 as authoritative for the whole world.

From this we see that while each Pope in his time has supreme authority over the Church, and may exercise his authority at any time, Holy Mother Church often works by a consensus of the Pope and the bishops developed over time. The faithful who see a teaching proclaimed by the Pope and all the bishops worldwide recognize in it the Holy Spirit’s silent authorship.

Were it true that the Holy Spirit guides each individual to a right understanding of Scripture, all Christians whether Catholic or Protestant would arrive at the same interpretation for every passage of Scripture. However, the number of Protestant interpretations, or denominations, today approaches thirty thousand, a theological bedlam.

The Catholic Church has Christ’s authority to interpret Scripture. St. Peter explicitly denied that individuals have such authority: 2 Pet 1:20 “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation.”

[redgolum]

There has never been a church that stayed faithful to Christ after they started ordaining women. Not one.

[Nihil Obstat]

thank you for that post and pictures - what town in Ohio is that?

>>>>Looking down from the statue towards the street, you see a landscaped scene of two hearts, an M for Mary and a cross.<<<

that is the back side of the Miraculous Medal, given from the visitation of Our Lady of Grace to Saint Catherine LaBoure - http://www.miraclerosarymission.org/saint1.htm

[Jaded]

There seems to be a comprehension problem. Try this one again.

1 Timothy 2: 11-12
Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection.

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you, MountainMenace. I'll look into that Manliness book you referenced. I think if people didn't have such a feeble and deficient grasp of the distinctive manly and womanly gifts (I include myself in that "deficient grasp" group) --- we'd thank God for the masculine character of the priesthood and find ways to encourage both sons and daughters in wholeness and holiness.

[wmfights]

Act 2:47 Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

The church is; any and all sinners who got saved...Am I saved??? Sure am...Do I belong to your Church...Heavens NO...I belong to Christ's church...Which is the body of believers, not an organization, or a fancy building...
_____________________________________

Too good not to respond to, AMEN Brother!

It's aways interesting how the discussion got turned from the original point, priests being married, or not. As marajade quickly pointed out SCRIPTURE does state that it would be good for priests to be married.

1Tim; 3:5 "If anyone does not know how to manage a family, how can he take care of God's church?"

[Iscool]

1Tim; 3:5 "If anyone does not know how to manage a family, how can he take care of God's church?"

That rather sums it up I'd say...

[dollars_for_dogma]

It's your choice, your church's dogma, or the Word of God...

"Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the

flesh of the Son and drink his blood, you have no life
in you;

he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal
life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed."

John 6:53-55 (KJV).

The above is the Word of God and Catholic Dogma:

The Eucharist: the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity
of Jesus Christ.

[dollars_for_dogma]

1Tim; 3:5 "If anyone does not know how to manage a family, how can he take care of God's church?"

The priest's family consists of the parish faithful.

He is responsible for the care and feeding of his people..

....he is the Shepherd of his parish family.

The parish priest is also the administrator of the

parish, which has a Church, maybe a school, charitable

organizations such as St. Vincent De Paul society..

[wmfights]

That is certainly a very tortured interpretation, but thank GOD we live in a country where you can do that. If you pray for the HOLY SPIRIT to guide you I think you will find your wrong.

[dollars_for_dogma]

And in times past, you would have burned my Bible and run me thru with a sword or burned me at the stake...

LOL! Another bigoted, anti-Catholic, straw-man argument.

For savage butchery of Christians see:

Oliver Cromwell

National Socialist German Workers Party

Former Soviet Union

North Korea

Communist China

And any Islamic country....