Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T18:06:41.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ordination to the Priesthood:‘That the one who acts in the person of Christ the Head must needs be male but need not be a Jew’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Simon Francis Gaine OP
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

If a priest must be male in order to represent Christ who was and is male, must he then be Jewish in order to represent Christ who was and is Jewish? My first aim is to clarify what I call the various elements or levels that go into or have gone into an explanation of the Church’s practice of not ordaining women. I am concerned here only with the reservation to men of the priestly or sacerdotal grades of the sacrament of order, namely the episcopate and the presbyterate (bishops and priests). I say this before going any further, because at one time ‘ordination’ had a very wide application, including to deaconesses, abbesses, empresses and so on. My discussion, however, will not even comment on the question of ordaining women to the diaconate, but is restricted to the priestly grades of order. My second aim is to ask how the relationships of Christ’s maleness and his Jewishness to the economy of salvation differ in such a way that though his priestly representative must needs be male he need not be a Jew. Thus I shall include here discussion of arguments for the restriction of the priestly grades to men only, particularly insofar as they might seem to imply that a priest must needs be not only male but also Jewish. I shall pursue my second aim against the background of the first, thus placing the question of maleness, Jewishness, Christ and the priesthood, in its wider theological-explanatory context. I shall begin my clarification of the various levels of explanation

Type
Research Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 83 , Issue 975 , May 2002 , pp. 212 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

References

1 Cf. Sullivan, F. SJ, ‘New Claims for the Pope’, The Tablet, 248 (1994), p. 769Google Scholar.

2 See the CDF's response dated 28 October 1995 and Card. J. Ratzinger's ‘Reflections’ on the apostolic letter.

3 Sullivan, , Creative Fidelity. Weighing and Interpreting Documents of the Magisterium (Gill and Macmillan, Dublin, 1996), p. 181fGoogle Scholar.

4 Tr. by Sullivan, Magisterium. Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church (Gill and Macmillan, Dublin, 1983), p. 132.

5 Cf. also the CDF commentary on the Profession, which was issued in connection with Ad Tuendam Fidem in 1998.

6 Justice in the Church. Gender and Participation (Catholic University, Washington DC, 1996), p. 209.

7 On the canonical tradition, see Martin, John Hilary OP. The Ordination of Women and the Theologians in the Middle Ages’, Escritos del Vedat, 16 (1986), pp. 126–44Google Scholar.

8 3.6 (tr. by R. H. Connelly, Clarendon, Oxford, p. 133).

9 Panarion, 3.2.79 (PG 42:744).

10 X 5.38.10.

11 The canonical text cited is from Johannes Teutonicus's Glossa Ordinaria, in D. C. 27.1.23 v. Ordinari.

12 For Fishacre's text, see Martin, “The Ordination of Women’, p. 144f., n. 65. Martin adds that Fishacre's treatment was followed by another Oxford Dominican, Simon of Hinton.

13 In IV Sent., q. 25, a. 4, n. 1 (Brixiae, 1591, III, p. 388f.). His text seems to have still been influential in the fifteenth century: see Guido Brianson OFM, In IV Sent., q. 12, c. 1 (Baland, 1512, f. 193v).

14 See Martin, John Hilary OP, ‘The Injustice of not Ordaining Women: A Problem for Medieval Theologians’, Theological Studies, 48 (1987), pp. 303–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Shannon, Thomas A., ‘A Scotist Aside to the Ordination‐of‐Women Debate’, Theological Studies, 56 (1995), p. 353fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Ordinatio, In IV Sent., q. 25, a. 2 (Wadding IX, p. 570).

16 In IV Sent., d. 25, q. 1, a. 3 (Venice, 1578, II, f. 156r).

17 In IV Sent., d. 25, q. 2 (Venice, 1595, p. 818)

18 In IV Sent., d. 25, q. 3, a. 1 (Paris, 1514, f. 133v).

19 Ferrara, Dennis M., ‘The Ordination of Women: Tradition and Meaning’, Theological Studies, 55 (1994), p. 714fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 However, in the fifteenth century Gabriel Biel does treat the matter in terms similar to those of Peter de la Palude. See the Supplementum in XXVIII distinctiones ultimas Quarti sententiarum, d. 25, q. 1 (Paris, 1521, f. 32r)

21 Summa Theologiae, 3a., q. 83, a. 1 ad 2 & 3 (Blackfriars LIX, p. 136f.)

22 In IV Sent., a. 2, q. 1, conc. (Vivès VI, p. 200).

23 The text from In IV Sent., q. 2, qa. 1 ad 4 is incorporated in the supplement to the Summa, q. 39, a. 1.

24 Cited by Martin, ‘The Ordination of Women’, p. 175, n. 131.

35 ‘Scholastic Theology and the Case against Women's Ordination’, The Heythrop Journal, 36 (1995), p. 258Google Scholar.

26 Ibid., pp. 274ff. See also Martin, ‘The Ordination of Women’, pp. 156–90.

27 ‘The Injustice of not Ordaining Women: A Problem for Medieval Theologians’, p. 309.

28 Reportatio, In IV Sent., d. 25, q. 2 (Wadding XI.2, p. 784).

29 In IV Sent., d. 25, q. 4 (Venice, 1507, IV 41r)

30 In the previous century the English Dominican, William of Chatton (text in Martin, “The Ordination of Women’, p. 149, n. 74). Short treatments might also do no more than record the inability of women to be ordained, e.g., an anonymous Franciscan (text in Martin, ibid., n. 73), or more specifically to receive the character, e.g., Ulrich of Strasbourg OP. Compendium Theologiae Veritatis, bk. 6, ch. 6, in Beati Alberti Magni Opera (Lyons, 1651,XII.2, p. 121f.).

31 See Butler, , ‘Women's Ordination and the Development of Doctrine’, The Thomist, 61 (1997), pp. 506–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 E.g. Michael de Palacio, O. Carm., In IV Sent., q. 12, c. 1 (Salamanca, 1627, p. 513).

33 ‘Apostolic Office: Sacrament of Christ’, Theological Studies, 36 (1975), pp. 243–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 Ashley, Justice in the Church, pp. 174ff.

35 ‘Representation or Self‐Effacement: The Axiom In Persona Christi in St. Thomas and the Magisterium’, Theological Studies, 55 (1994), pp. 195–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘The Ordination of Women: Tradition and Meaning’, ibid., pp. 706–19; ‘In Persona Christi: Toward a Second Naiveté’, ibid., 57 (1996), pp. 65–88.

36 Butler, , ‘A Response to Dennis M. Ferrara’, Theological Studies, 56 (1995), pp. 61–80Google Scholar; Ferrara, ‘A Reply to Sara Butler’, ibid., pp. 81–91; Mansini, Guy OSB, ‘Representation and Agency in the Eucharist’, The Thomist, 62 (1988), pp. 499–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ashley, Justice in the Church, pp. 175–9.

37 sec. 5 Women Priests: Obstacle to Unity?, CTS, London, p. 15).

38 Justice in the Church, p. 181, n. 27.

39 secs. 13 & 2.

40 Ferrara, ‘Representation or Self‐Effacement’, p. 215, makes a comparable distinction, but his notion of representation is drawn more from drama, and his aim is to argue that while Christ is a representative he is not a representation.

41 Women Priests: Obstacle to Unity?, p. 42.

42 In III Sent., d. 12, q. 3, a. 1, qa. 2, sol. 2 (Moos III, p. 387).

43 Summa Theologiae, III a., q. 31, a. 4 ad 1.

44 In III Sent., d. 12, a. 3, q. 1 (IV, p. 270).

45 Bridegroom, Father and Son are the images presented in Inter Insigniores. For a broader ‘system or complex of mutually interpretative and reinforcing symbols’, see Ashley, Justice in the Church, pp. 91–118.

46 For an example of such an approach, see ibid., pp. 102–111.