Ordain a Lady

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,281
3,101
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
“Founded in 1975, the Women’s Ordination Conference (WOC) is a grass-roots driven movement that promotes activism, dialogue, and prayerful witness to call for women’s ordination and gender equity in the Roman Catholic Church.”

This is a music video the WOC produced for the cause.


The lyric which caught my attention: ”Don’t listen to Saint Paul, ’Cuz I can lead the way.”

Setting aside that this a Roman Catholic fight, it is an issue that has come up and continues to come up in Protestant circles.

”Don’t listen to Saint Paul” is an argument which I don’t find persuasive.

Can that hurdle be cleared using scripture?
Hey there !

JohnPaul the Great defintively closed the door on this debate when he said:

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 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."

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994) | John Paul II


Pax et Bonum
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthias

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,557
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
“Stop what you are doing & watch this video clip about the women who were fighting against the conservatives during the SBC conservative resurgence.

They self-admittedly had LGBT inclusion as part of their push for women pastors. They cite the slippery slope positively. Amazing.”

(Colin Smothers)


I’d use the word “shocking” rather than “amazing”. It’s not the SBC I grew up in. I think it should be pointed out, however, that this doesn’t mean that all who were fighting against the conservatives were in favor of LGBT inclusion as pastors.

The slippery slope. Where does it end? Closer to the top or closer to the bottom? Once the slide is on, it’s difficult to control.
 

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
Nope-I cannot agree with you.
I’m not expecting you to agree with me in this regard, Johann.
I understand and respect your reasons to disagree.

I listen to them speak about their feelings, noting the tone of their voices and the words that they are using. I see and hear that they’ve been respectful of one another in their communication. (A detail that you didn’t provide - and I’m taking advantage of!)

I’m looking at the way the two women are dressed. I take it that they are fairly representative of the two groups, though one of the women is wearing slacks or jeans rather than a dress, and her shirt is unbuttoned at the top but showing very little cleavage. While they are dressed differently, their clothes are clean, they fit each woman well, they’re not wrinkled or soiled; their hair, skin and nails appear to be clean and well-cared for, they‘re both dressed modestly. They’re feminine in appearance. Both have followed Paul’s instructions to women in the church.

I note something else: their body language. They‘re sitting close together. Their heads are touching. Their eyes are sparkling. Their nostrils are neither flared nor closed. Their mouths are closed and their lips are smiling. Their hands are folded peacefully together. Their posture is good. They’re looking at me, not at the floor or ceiling. If there is a problem between them, their body language doesn’t show it. They give the impression of genuinely loving one another as sisters in the faith, and of being ready to listen and work cooperatively together to resolve their differences.

I would share these observations with them. I would ask them an important question -> How have the men in the congregation been acting toward them? (I haven’t seen or heard any of the men talking about it, or acting improperly around them. Maybe the women have noticed something with them that I haven’t. If they have, they haven’t shared it with me.)

If the way the women are dressed isn’t causing a problem for the men, then the problem is much smaller than if it were causing a problem for them. Assuming that it isn’t a problem for the men, this is strictly a female vs. female issue. So what is the real problem? Is it jealousy? Is it envy? Is it something that isn’t really related to attire and that clothing is just a convenient excuse? Is it a power struggle? Is it a culture issue?

From all that I’ve been able to gather, it appears to be a culture related issue. Education on respective cultures may be all that is needed to resolve the problem. If that proved to be the case, I would ask them how they would like to go about doing that. If a mutually acceptable way is agreed upon between them, that’s what I would recommend. I would follow-up to confirm that it was done and then inquire if that was sufficient to resolve the problem. If it was, problem solved. If it wasn’t, I would find out why and then seek a solution for it.

In the meantime, I would ask them to show grace to one another; to act as they did when they came to me with the problem. Love one another, the standing order for all in the faith.

That’s best case scenario.

What, though, if it doesn’t go down that way? What if the body language changed as the meeting progressed, the tone of voice became ominous and the words became harsh?

I’ve had some tense meetings in real life but never anything that I wasn’t able to gain control of quickly. I would remind the contentious parties that we’re Christians, not barbarians, and should act like it. I might suggest a brief recess if things got to that point. When the meeting resumed, I would start the process again. What is the body language saying now? Have things been said that need to be apologized for? Reevaluate the problem. It wasn’t what I thought it was? I need to find out what the problem really is before we can move forward.
I thank you for such a description of a loving, intelligent approach.
Yesch, couldn’t have found better adjectives: loving and intelligent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthias

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
I would like to point out that our eyes would never reject such beautiful looking women, no matter what they wore…..just saying…..perhaps if they were ugly women, we might not be swayed in our opinions?

But if one walked into a church and saw women wearing hijabs, there would be only one conclusion to be drawn…..it is religious attire, and nothing to do with Christian modesty.

I also wonder why covering the hair is such an important thing in Islam, as it is basically what identifies a woman as Muslim……as Christians, we believe what Paul wrote…

”Does not nature itself teach you that long hair is a dishonor to a man, 15 but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her instead of a covering. 16 However, if anyone wants to argue in favor of some other custom, we have no other, nor do the congregations of God.” (1 Cor 11:14-16)

Since a woman’s hair is “given to her instead of a head covering” why the need to wear a head covering?
Paul says no other argument to the contrary is valid as there is just one standard for all.

And since this is not a scriptural command, but a tradition of men in another faith, a Christian woman would wear what is appropriate dress in her culture. Jesus teaches modesty, but the fashion traits of the times often dictate what is acceptable to the masses who follow it. But for Christians, there is only one standard of modesty….God’s standard.
And it does not include covering a woman’s hair as if only her husband and children are allowed to see her at home without one. Strongly entrenched traditions, if they have no basis in scripture, are the teachings of men…..to be discarded by those who want to please God, not in following tradition for the sake of it.
Hi Aunty Jane

I’m puzzled by your answer.

Paul recommends that women cover their hair while praying or prophesying (things regularly done at church). (1 Cor 11:5,6)

I don’t find a biblical or rational basis to assert that “God’s standard” forbids covering the hair, in the same way that I wouldn’t find basis to assert than “God’s standard” forbids shoes and demands sandals or bare feet.

The hijab model is much closer to the model wore by Mary and the women who followed Jesus, and closer to the women who helped Paul in his mission. So, how do you support you claim that Hijab has “nothing to do” with Christian modesty?

Finally, I don’t understand how traditions that have no basis on scripture should be discarded to please God. Should we discard them because they lead to sin, or because they don’t appear in the Bible? These are two very different things.
Don’t you follow dozens of traditions in your daily life that have no basis on Scripture (eg Christmas, birthdays and using tooth paste and shampoo?) I invite you, my sister, to consider whether you are adjudicating to the Bible functions that the Bible itself never claims.

1718423695285.jpeg
 

BlessedPeace

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2023
5,917
4,613
113
Bend
youtube.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are desperately trying to justify rejecting the very councils that ratified the Holy Books as inspired. You make no sense whatsoever.
I understand how I make no sense to you. Yes. And that is Scripture too. :)
Tell that to the so called reformers who instigated division and schisms, that has not stopped for 500 years.
Ah, you're a Roman Catholic. The site should offer that RC option when new people register. This way we are able to discern who is who here.
That's no excuse for women trying to be men that violates God's order of creation.
Not at all relative to this discussion. Though your pov does provide further insight into your theology. Thanks . :)


Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ritajanice

Jude Thaddeus

Active Member
Apr 27, 2024
637
222
43
73
ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Ah, you're a Roman Catholic. The site should offer that RC option when new people register. This way we are able to discern who is who here.
I agree. Members should register a link to their church so people can get on the same page, and speak the same language, instead of guessing which of the 40,000 theologies a member adheres to. Store front Bible cults and fundie "home churches" are so anti-institutional they can't even organize an inner city soup kitchen, let alone have a web site. Then there is the internet Christian who sits at home browsing various anti-Catholic web pages (billions of them) and finds some juicy claim against Catholics, and brings it into discussion boards thinking they have "gotcha" argument. Then there is the Bible expert who didn't finish high school and falls for every lie about Bible origins, and has no clue about the importance of councils.
 

Stumpmaster

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2009
2,525
1,673
113
70
Hamilton, New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
I agree. Members should register a link to their church so people can get on the same page, and speak the same language, instead of guessing which of the 40,000 theologies a member adheres to. Store front Bible cults and fundie "home churches" are so anti-institutional they can't even organize an inner city soup kitchen, let alone have a web site. Then there is the internet Christian who sits at home browsing various anti-Catholic web pages (billions of them) and finds some juicy claim against Catholics, and brings it into discussion boards thinking they have "gotcha" argument. Then there is the Bible expert who didn't finish high school and falls for every lie about Bible origins.
Bible-believer here :tiphat:
 

BlessedPeace

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2023
5,917
4,613
113
Bend
youtube.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I agree. Members should register a link to their church so people can get on the same page, and speak the same language, instead of guessing which of the 40,000 theologies a member adheres to. Store front Bible cults and fundie "home churches" are so anti-institutional they can't even organize an inner city soup kitchen, let alone have a web site. Then there is the internet Christian who sits at home browsing various anti-Catholic web pages (billions of them) and finds some juicy claim against Catholics, and brings it into discussion boards thinking they have "gotcha" argument. Then there is the Bible expert who didn't finish high school and falls for every lie about Bible origins, and has no clue about the importance of councils.
BoL,MoG,is that you?:waves:

One thing that is held in common by certain Roman Catholics here is,rage.

Not all of course. Just those few who think to defend their church ideology using ad homs, personal attacks, against those they cannot speak to civilly.

It's a fascinating correlary in how they all resort to the same offense. Thinking they're a fine example in the process defending the God of love as the Prince of Peace.
It also informs what their church instills into them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ritajanice

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,018
3,850
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I’m puzzled by your answer.
Why would you be puzzled? If a person walks into a church and sees a lot of women wearing a hijab, which basically declares a woman to be Muslim, what would they assume, if no one else is wearing one?
There is no scriptural reason for women to wear a head covering….unless one is assuming a role that is normally assigned to a brother. Praying in his presence and wearing a head covering is showing submission to God’s arrangement of headship. A sign even to the angels.
Paul recommends that women cover their hair while praying or prophesying (things regularly done at church). (1 Cor 11:5,6)
1 Cor 11:7-10…
”For a man should not have his head covered, as he is God’s image and glory, but the woman is man’s glory. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman came from man. 9 And what is more, man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man. 10 That is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.”

In today’s world that would not sit too well, but if we remember back to the creation of Adam and Eve that Paul alludes to here, we see that the gender roles were specific and complimented each other. There was no competition, and if everyone humbly kept their God assigned place, there is no room for complaint….it doesn’t make women second class citizens but cherished in the role that God gave them.

The hijab model is much closer to the model wore by Mary and the women who followed Jesus, and closer to the women who helped Paul in his mission. So, how do you support you claim that Hijab has “nothing to do” with Christian modesty?
I have not seen any depiction of women in Bible times wearing a hijab as if a single strand of hair showing was obscene. It is God given and a glory to women. And remember too that a head covering was a protection from the Middle Eastern sun.
A Catholic nun’s habit was closer to a hijab for some reason that escapes me….
Finally, I don’t understand how traditions that have no basis on scripture should be discarded to please God. Should we discard them because they lead to sin, or because they don’t appear in the Bible? These are two very different things.
Don’t you follow dozens of traditions in your daily life that have no basis on Scripture (eg Christmas, birthdays
JW‘s have no religious traditions that are borrowed from paganism because we are forbidden in scripture to pollute our worship with the trappings of false worship. There is nothing “Christian” about Christmas, birthdays or Easter.…which today are celebrated as commercial events in most parts of the world……Since these originated in false worship we will not celebrate them. (2 Cor 6:14-18) We will instead celebrate things that are important to us personally, and which do not go against Christ’s teachings.
Did you never wonder why every single religious observance held in Christendom is not of Christian origin?

using tooth paste and shampoo?) I invite you, my sister, to consider whether you are adjudicating to the Bible functions that the Bible itself never claims.
……well, our choice of toiletries is not exactly a religious decision. But the doctrines that Christendom holds are not scripturally based. Most are rebranded adoptions from paganism. We can discuss them if you like, perhaps on another thread……?
 
J

Johann

Guest
I agree. Members should register a link to their church so people can get on the same page, and speak the same language, instead of guessing which of the 40,000 theologies a member adheres to. Store front Bible cults and fundie "home churches" are so anti-institutional they can't even organize an inner city soup kitchen, let alone have a web site. Then there is the internet Christian who sits at home browsing various anti-Catholic web pages (billions of them) and finds some juicy claim against Catholics, and brings it into discussion boards thinking they have "gotcha" argument. Then there is the Bible expert who didn't finish high school and falls for every lie about Bible origins, and has no clue about the importance of councils.
We need more Reformers
 
J

Johann

Guest
Can that hurdle be cleared using scripture?
Perhaps you can include this with your question--

Jewish Practices in the First Century
Priestly Roles (Kohanim)
In first-century Judaism, the priestly class, known as the Kohanim (כּהֲנִים), held significant religious authority. These priests, descending from Aaron, performed temple rituals, sacrifices, and other religious duties. The roles within the Temple were strictly male and hereditary, based on lineage from Aaron:

High Priest (Kohen Gadol) - The Kohen Gadol (כּהֵן גָּדוֹל) was the highest religious authority in the Temple, responsible for significant rituals, including the Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) services.
Regular Priests (Kohanim) - These priests performed daily sacrifices, offerings, and other ritual services in the Temple.
Levitical Roles (Levi'im)
The Levi'im (לְוִיִּם), or Levites, also held hereditary roles associated with the Temple. They assisted the Kohanim, provided music and song during Temple services, and performed various other duties. Like the Kohanim, the Levi'im were exclusively male and chosen by lineage from the tribe of Levi.

Synagogue Leadership
The role of the synagogue, as opposed to the Temple, was growing in importance during the first century. Synagogues served as local centers for worship, teaching, and community gatherings. The leadership roles in synagogues included:

Rosh HaKnesset (ראש הכנסת) - The head of the synagogue, who oversaw services and administrative duties.
Chazzan (חַזָּן) - The cantor or prayer leader, responsible for leading the congregation in prayer and sometimes for reading from the Torah.
While men primarily occupied these roles, women were involved in synagogue life but did not hold formal leadership positions.

Female Religious Roles
Prophetesses
While formal priestly and Levitical roles were reserved for men, there is evidence in the Hebrew Scriptures of women serving in significant religious capacities, particularly as prophetesses:

Miriam (מִרְיָם) - Moses' sister, who is described as a prophetess (Exodus 15:20).
Deborah (דְּבוֹרָה) - A judge and prophetess who led Israel and delivered God's messages (Judges 4-5).
Huldah (חֻלְדָּה) - A prophetess consulted by King Josiah's officials (2 Kings 22:14-20).
These examples indicate that women did hold influential religious roles, although these were not institutionalized in the same way as the priestly and Levitical duties.

Early Christian Context
The early Christian movement, emerging from this Jewish context, began to reinterpret and expand religious roles in light of Jesus' teachings and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The concept of the priesthood of all believers, rooted in passages like 1 Peter 2:9 and Galatians 3:28, suggested a democratization of religious authority that transcended traditional Jewish distinctions.

1 Peter 2:9 - "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."
Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
These texts reflect a significant shift from the exclusive male priesthood of Judaism to an inclusive vision where all believers, regardless of gender, could participate in religious leadership.


Understanding first-century Jewish practices highlights the significant shift that early Christianity represented, moving from a strictly male and hereditary priesthood to a more inclusive framework. While the traditional Jewish roles of Kohanim and Levi'im were exclusively male, the early Christian community, influenced by the teachings of Jesus and the inclusive vision of the early apostles, began to embrace a broader participation in religious life. This historical and cultural context underscores the transformative nature of early Christian views on leadership, which laid the groundwork for subsequent debates on the ordination of women.

J.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthias and RedFan

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
JohnPaul the Great defintively closed the door on this debate when he said:

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 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."

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994) | John Paul II
With all due respect, I think the authority to ordain women priests does reside with the Church. John Paul II just decided that it should not be exercised, and he cast it as though the Church was forbidden to allow it. That's fine for Catholics who must abide by such Papal pronouncements. Protestants are not so bound. They are part of "the Church" too (although Rome might not see it that way).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann
J

Johann

Guest
There is no scriptural reason for women to wear a head covering….unless one is assuming a role that is normally assigned to a brother. Praying in his presence and wearing a head covering is showing submission to God’s arrangement of headship. A sign even to the angels.
Maybe we can gain a deeper understanding from the Jewish customs and cultures?

Jewish Writings and Customs on Head Coverings
Talmudic References
The Talmud, a central text in Rabbinic Judaism, contains several references to head coverings for both men and women. These texts provide insights into the customs and religious significance of head coverings in ancient Jewish culture.

Men’s Head Coverings (כיפה - Kippah, טלית - Tallit)

Kippah (כיפה): The kippah, or yarmulke, is a small cap worn by Jewish men to signify reverence for God. It serves as a constant reminder of God's presence above.
Tallit (טלית): A prayer shawl worn during morning prayers. The tallit includes fringes (ציצית - tzitzit) as commanded in Numbers 15:38-40. While not a head covering per se, the tallit can be draped over the head during prayer as a sign of humility and respect.
Women’s Head Coverings (כיסוי ראש - Kisui Rosh)

Kisui Rosh (כיסוי ראש): This term broadly means "head covering." Married Jewish women traditionally covered their hair as a sign of modesty and marital status.
Sheitel (שייטל): A wig worn by some married Orthodox Jewish women to cover their natural hair.
Tichel (טיכל): A headscarf or kerchief used by Jewish women to cover their hair. This practice is rooted in modesty laws and customs.
Cultural Significance
Modesty and Marital Status

Sotah 10b: The Talmud discusses how a woman’s hair covering signifies her modesty and marital status. Uncovering a married woman's hair was considered a public disgrace.
Ketubot 72a: This tractate addresses the importance of a married woman covering her hair, considering it a part of Jewish law and custom.
Ritual Purity and Community Standards

Nedarim 30b: Describes how head coverings are part of community standards for modesty and religious practice.
Berakhot 24a: Discusses the importance of women covering their hair during prayer and other religious activities.
Biblical and Cultural Contexts
Biblical Passages
While the Talmud provides extensive details, the Hebrew Bible itself also offers insights:

Genesis 24:65: Rebekah covers herself with a veil (צָעִיף - tsa'if) upon meeting Isaac, indicating modesty and propriety.
Numbers 5:18: During the Sotah ritual, the priest uncovers (פרע - para) the woman’s head, signifying a transition from a state of modesty to one of public scrutiny.
Hebrew Terms for Coverings
Tsa'if (צָעִיף): A veil or shawl, often used in contexts of modesty or betrothal.
Kisui Rosh (כיסוי ראש): General term for head covering, used primarily for women.
R'alah (רְעָלָה): Another term for veil, used in contexts indicating protection and modesty.
Migba'at (מִגְבַּעַת): A turban or headdress, often used for priests in the Temple (Exodus 28:4).
Cultural Practices in the First Century
In the first-century Jewish context, both men and women had specific customs related to head coverings:

Men’s Practices

Jewish men often covered their heads as a sign of respect, particularly during prayer and religious rituals.
The tallit (prayer shawl) sometimes covered the head during prayers, indicating a deeper state of reverence.
Women’s Practices

Married women typically covered their hair in public, adhering to standards of modesty.
Head coverings for women varied from simple scarves (tichel) to more elaborate veils, depending on social status and community norms.

Understanding the ancient Jewish practices regarding head coverings, as documented in the Talmud and other sources, sheds light on the cultural and religious backdrop of Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 11. These customs emphasized modesty, respect, and adherence to community standards. In Jewish tradition, head coverings were not only a sign of personal piety but also an expression of one's role and status within the religious and social hierarchy. This historical context provides a deeper appreciation of the theological and cultural dimensions of head coverings in early Christian communities.
 
J

Johann

Guest
With all due respect, I think the authority to ordain women priests does reside with the Church. John Paul II just decided that it should not be exercised, and he cast it as though the Church was forbidden to allow it. That's fine for Catholics who must abide by such Papal pronouncements. Protestants are not so bound. They are part of "the Church" too (although Rome might not see it that way).
Just found this-see if you agree @RedFan

Pope John Paul II’s declaration in his apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994) 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, is a definitive and authoritative statement within the Roman Catholic Church. This teaching reflects a long-standing tradition within Catholicism regarding the nature of priesthood and apostolic succession. To understand whether there is any historical or scriptural evidence to the contrary, it is essential to examine both the theological and historical contexts of this issue.

Historical and Theological Context
Early Church Practices

In the early Christian communities, there is evidence of women serving in various significant roles, such as deaconesses (διάκονοι) and prophets (προφήτες). Examples include Phoebe, a deaconess mentioned in Romans 16:1, and Junia, referred to as "outstanding among the apostles" in Romans 16:7.
However, the specific office of "priest" (presbyter or elder) has traditionally been seen as an extension of the apostolic ministry, which, according to Catholic tradition, was instituted by Christ with the twelve male apostles as its foundation.
Patristic Writings

Early Church Fathers such as Tertullian, St. Augustine, and St. John Chrysostom emphasized the male-only priesthood, viewing it as rooted in both Scripture and Tradition.
The Didascalia Apostolorum (3rd century) and the Apostolic Constitutions (4th century) provide instructions on church order and roles, consistently reserving priestly functions for men.
Magisterial Teaching

The teaching authority of the Church (Magisterium) has consistently upheld the male-only priesthood. The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) reaffirmed the role of the ordained ministry as being reserved for men.
Pope Paul VI, in his 1976 document Inter Insigniores, articulated that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is not a statement about women’s worth or capabilities but is based on Christ’s example and the unbroken tradition of the Church.
Scriptural Arguments
Jesus' Example

Proponents of the male-only priesthood argue that Jesus chose only men as his apostles, despite the significant roles played by women in his ministry. This choice is seen as a deliberate action with theological implications.
The Last Supper, which is considered the institution of the Eucharist and the priesthood, was attended only by the twelve apostles, all of whom were men.
New Testament Writings

Passages such as 1 Timothy 2:12-14 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 are often cited to support the view that authoritative teaching and leadership roles within the Church were intended for men.
Arguments and Counterarguments
Cultural Context

Some scholars argue that the exclusion of women from the priesthood reflects the cultural norms of the time rather than a divine mandate. They point to the broader participation of women in early Christian communities as evidence that women were integral to church life and ministry.
However, the Magisterium holds that while cultural context is essential, the actions and choices of Jesus and the apostles transcend cultural norms and are rooted in divine revelation.
Development of Doctrine

The Catholic Church teaches that doctrine can develop in understanding but not change in substance. Proponents of women’s ordination argue for a development in understanding gender roles in the light of modern insights into equality and justice.
The Church, however, maintains that the male-only priesthood is part of the immutable deposit of faith, as reiterated by John Paul II.
Conclusion
Pope John Paul II's definitive statement in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis closes the debate on the ordination of women within the Roman Catholic Church by asserting that the Church does not have the authority to confer priestly ordination on women. This position is deeply rooted in a long-standing theological tradition, scriptural interpretation, and the teachings of the early Church Fathers and councils.

While there are historical instances of significant female roles in early Christianity and scholarly arguments that challenge the male-only priesthood, the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church remains firmly against the ordination of women. This teaching is considered definitive and is to be held by all the faithful, as it pertains to the Church's understanding of its divine constitution and the sacrament of Holy Orders.

J.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philip James

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just found this-see if you agree @RedFan

Pope John Paul II’s declaration in his apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994) 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, is a definitive and authoritative statement within the Roman Catholic Church. This teaching reflects a long-standing tradition within Catholicism regarding the nature of priesthood and apostolic succession. To understand whether there is any historical or scriptural evidence to the contrary, it is essential to examine both the theological and historical contexts of this issue.

Historical and Theological Context
Early Church Practices

In the early Christian communities, there is evidence of women serving in various significant roles, such as deaconesses (διάκονοι) and prophets (προφήτες). Examples include Phoebe, a deaconess mentioned in Romans 16:1, and Junia, referred to as "outstanding among the apostles" in Romans 16:7.
However, the specific office of "priest" (presbyter or elder) has traditionally been seen as an extension of the apostolic ministry, which, according to Catholic tradition, was instituted by Christ with the twelve male apostles as its foundation.
Patristic Writings

Early Church Fathers such as Tertullian, St. Augustine, and St. John Chrysostom emphasized the male-only priesthood, viewing it as rooted in both Scripture and Tradition.
The Didascalia Apostolorum (3rd century) and the Apostolic Constitutions (4th century) provide instructions on church order and roles, consistently reserving priestly functions for men.
Magisterial Teaching

The teaching authority of the Church (Magisterium) has consistently upheld the male-only priesthood. The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) reaffirmed the role of the ordained ministry as being reserved for men.
Pope Paul VI, in his 1976 document Inter Insigniores, articulated that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is not a statement about women’s worth or capabilities but is based on Christ’s example and the unbroken tradition of the Church.
Scriptural Arguments
Jesus' Example

Proponents of the male-only priesthood argue that Jesus chose only men as his apostles, despite the significant roles played by women in his ministry. This choice is seen as a deliberate action with theological implications.
The Last Supper, which is considered the institution of the Eucharist and the priesthood, was attended only by the twelve apostles, all of whom were men.
New Testament Writings

Passages such as 1 Timothy 2:12-14 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 are often cited to support the view that authoritative teaching and leadership roles within the Church were intended for men.
Arguments and Counterarguments
Cultural Context

Some scholars argue that the exclusion of women from the priesthood reflects the cultural norms of the time rather than a divine mandate. They point to the broader participation of women in early Christian communities as evidence that women were integral to church life and ministry.
However, the Magisterium holds that while cultural context is essential, the actions and choices of Jesus and the apostles transcend cultural norms and are rooted in divine revelation.
Development of Doctrine

The Catholic Church teaches that doctrine can develop in understanding but not change in substance. Proponents of women’s ordination argue for a development in understanding gender roles in the light of modern insights into equality and justice.
The Church, however, maintains that the male-only priesthood is part of the immutable deposit of faith, as reiterated by John Paul II.
Conclusion
Pope John Paul II's definitive statement in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis closes the debate on the ordination of women within the Roman Catholic Church by asserting that the Church does not have the authority to confer priestly ordination on women. This position is deeply rooted in a long-standing theological tradition, scriptural interpretation, and the teachings of the early Church Fathers and councils.

While there are historical instances of significant female roles in early Christianity and scholarly arguments that challenge the male-only priesthood, the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church remains firmly against the ordination of women. This teaching is considered definitive and is to be held by all the faithful, as it pertains to the Church's understanding of its divine constitution and the sacrament of Holy Orders.

J.
I agree that this is what "the Magisterium" teaches, but I don't agree with all of the teaching. I align myself with those who view Paul's writings on the subject to be a refection of his times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,018
3,850
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
@Johan….since the Talmud was a later work and not reflective of the Christians of that time, I don’t see that Jewish customs would have had a great impact on what were largely Gentile Christians at that stage. These were generations away from Judaism.

Just my thoughts….
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedFan
J

Johann

Guest
since the Talmud was a later work and not reflective of the Christians of that time, I don’t see that Jewish customs would have had a great impact on what were largely Gentile Christians at that stage. These were generations away from Judaism.
Not really-
Scholarly Analysis of Early Christian Practices and Jewish Influences
It is essential to examine historical, cultural, and textual evidence from the early Christian period. Although the Talmud was compiled later and primarily reflects post-Temple Judaism, earlier Jewish customs and practices had significant influences on early Christian communities, including those comprised of Gentile converts. This analysis will explore the extent and nature of this influence.

Jewish Influence on Early Christianity
Historical Context:

Early Christianity emerged within the Jewish context of the first-century Roman Empire. Jesus and his initial followers were Jewish, and the early Christian movement began as a Jewish sect.
The early Christian texts, including the New Testament, were written by Jews who were deeply familiar with Jewish customs and traditions.
Paul’s Ministry and Gentile Converts:

The Apostle Paul, a key figure in spreading Christianity to the Gentiles, was a Jewish Pharisee who maintained certain Jewish practices and teachings even after his conversion.
Paul's letters, including 1 Corinthians, address mixed communities of Jewish and Gentile believers, indicating a blend of Jewish and Hellenistic cultural influences.
Evidence from the New Testament
1 Corinthians 11:2-16:

Paul's instructions regarding head coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 reflect a concern for maintaining order and propriety within the Christian worship setting. He appeals to cultural norms that both Jewish and Greco-Roman audiences would understand.
The specific practice of women covering their heads while praying or prophesying aligns with Jewish customs of the time, suggesting that these norms were influential even in predominantly Gentile Christian communities.
Acts and Pauline Letters:

The Book of Acts and Paul's letters document numerous interactions between Jewish and Gentile Christians, highlighting ongoing discussions about the role of Jewish law and customs within the Christian faith (e.g., Acts 15, Galatians 2).
Scholarly Perspectives
Influence of Jewish Customs:

Scholars like James D.G. Dunn and N.T. Wright emphasize that early Christianity cannot be fully understood without considering its Jewish roots. These roots influenced not only theological concepts but also communal practices and norms.

Wayne A. Meeks,
in The First Urban Christians, points out that early Christian communities often adopted and adapted Jewish practices, including those related to worship and communal life.
Cultural Integration:

The Greco-Roman world was a melting pot of cultures and religions. Early Christian communities, while distinct, did not develop in isolation. They were influenced by both Jewish traditions and the surrounding Greco-Roman culture.

Bruce Winter, in After Paul Left Corinth, discusses how Paul’s instructions often sought to navigate and integrate diverse cultural practices to maintain unity and order within the church.

Talmud and Earlier Jewish Texts
Pre-Talmudic Sources:

Although the Talmud was compiled later, earlier Jewish texts and traditions, such as the Mishnah (circa 200 CE) and other Second Temple Jewish writings, provide context for understanding first-century Jewish practices.
Philo of Alexandria and Josephus, contemporaries of the early Christian movement, offer insights into Jewish customs that would have been known to early Christians.
Head Coverings and Modesty:

Jewish texts like the Mishnah and writings of Philo emphasize modesty and the covering of the head for women as a sign of respect and propriety. These practices were well-established and would have influenced Jewish and, by extension, early Christian communities.
Conclusion
The influence of Jewish customs on early Christian practices, including those in predominantly Gentile communities, is well-documented in historical and scholarly sources. While the Talmud itself was compiled later, the traditions and customs it reflects were already in practice during the first century and had a significant impact on the early Christian movement.

Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 11 regarding head coverings for women demonstrate an adaptation of Jewish customs within a Greco-Roman context. These instructions aimed to maintain decorum and propriety in worship, reflecting a blend of cultural influences. Therefore, understanding the early Christian context requires recognizing the interplay between Jewish traditions and the broader Greco-Roman environment in which these communities developed.

Mishnah:

The Mishnah is the first major written redaction of the Jewish oral traditions and was compiled around 200 CE by Rabbi Judah the Prince (Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi) in the Land of Israel.
Gemara:

The Gemara consists of rabbinical analyses and commentary on the Mishnah. There are two versions of the Gemara:
Jerusalem Talmud (Talmud Yerushalmi): This version was compiled in the Land of Israel around 350-400 CE.
Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli): This version was compiled in Babylonia (modern-day Iraq) and is more comprehensive and authoritative. It was completed around 500-600 CE.

The process of compiling these texts took place over several centuries, reflecting the oral traditions, rabbinical discussions, and legal interpretations that evolved from the post-Second Temple period through late antiquity. While the Talmud itself was compiled after the time of early Christianity, it reflects Jewish customs and practices that were already in existence and influential during the first century.

Your thoughts @Aunty Jane?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedFan

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,557
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
“Childish leaders oppress my people, and women rule over them. O my people, your leaders mislead you; they send you down the wrong road. The LORD takes his place in court and presents his case against his people.”

(Isaiah 3:12-13, NLT)
 
J

Johann

Guest
“Childish leaders oppress my people, and women rule over them. O my people, your leaders mislead you; they send you down the wrong road. The LORD takes his place in court and presents his case against his people.”

(Isaiah 3:12-13, NLT)
In Isaiah 3:12-13 (NLT), the context describes a situation where the prophet Isaiah is condemning the state of leadership and governance among the people of Judah. Here’s an analysis of the context:

Childish leaders oppress my people:

This statement highlights the failure of the current leadership to provide wise and just governance. The term "childish" suggests immaturity, irresponsibility, and a lack of wisdom in decision-making.
Women rule over them:

In ancient Hebrew society, the idea of women ruling could be interpreted in different ways. It might suggest a disorderly or chaotic state where societal norms are disrupted. It could also imply that those in leadership roles, whether men or women, are not fulfilling their responsibilities properly.
Your leaders mislead you; they send you down the wrong road:

The leaders are accused of leading the people astray, either through incompetence, corruption, or by following misguided policies. This has resulted in the people being led down a path that is contrary to God’s will and detrimental to their well-being.
The LORD takes his place in court and presents his case against his people:

This signifies a judicial metaphor where God is portrayed as a plaintiff in a court of law, presenting evidence against His own people. It suggests that God is about to bring judgment upon them for their disobedience and failure to uphold justice and righteousness.
Overall, Isaiah 3:12-13 depicts a state of moral and political decay among the leadership of Judah. The leaders are criticized for their incompetence, their failure to provide just governance, and their role in leading the people astray. This passage serves as a warning of impending judgment from God due to the corruption and unfaithfulness of the leaders and the people.

J.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthias