Womenpriests, Ecumenism and the Catholic Church: The Grace to Admit When You're Wrong

A womanpriest, a rabbi and a canon lawyer walk into a bar. When they are seated the canon lawyer turns to the rabbi and says, "The Church finds you guilty of providing sanctuary for the ordination of this womanpriest. You are hereby excommunicated from the Catholic Church and separated forever from the earthly Body of Christ."

The rabbi returns a puzzled look and says in response, "But, I'm not Catholic. What's to excommunicate?"

With this, the canon lawyer twitches a bit in his seat. "Very well," he says, regaining his composure. "As a punishment for your actions, the Church will cease all interfaith dialogue and ecumenical outreach with the Jews of the world until you have apologized."

Again, the rabbi returns a confused stare. "But, monsignor," she protests. "The Church has already declared that it alone is the one true faith, effectively eliminating any common ground for engagement and dialogue with non-Catholics. Are you proposing that the Church will do this once more simply in order to spite me?"

The canon lawyer is now almost fit to be tied. "Dear Lord!" he finally exclaims. "Is there no punishment the Church can mete out that will adequately permit Her to express Her displeasure with you?"

At this point the womanpriest, exasperated and embarrassed on behalf of her Church, suggests, "There certainly is, monsignor. You could ordain her as a priest that has to work within an organization as crazy as the Church."

Ha ha, I just made that up that little joke (I know, it shows). But do you really think I'm kidding? The punchline may be made up, but the overall backdrop to this little chestnut is already unfolding in St. Louis, MO, where two female Roman Catholic priests, their rabbi hostess and a host of Diocesan and Vatican canon lawyers may be duking things out in the weeks and months to come. On November 11, the Central Reform (Jewish) Congregation hosted the ordination ceremony of two Roman Catholic Womenpriests.

There are two issues at hand here: Roman Catholic canon law which expressly restricts priestly ordination to men alone; and the potential affront to Jewish-Catholic relations by the actions of Rabbi Susan Talve, senior rabbi at Central Reform Congregation. I think that on both counts, the Church has painted itself into an ideological corner from which it will have a difficult time establishing constructive engagement with women (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) and with non-Catholic faiths (Protestant and non-Christian alike).

On the question of the ordination of women as Catholic priests, Pope Benedict has make it crystal clear that this question is out of the question, period. In his roll as the head of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 1995: "it cannot be forgotten that the Church teaches, as an absolutely fundamental truth of Christian anthropology, the equal personal dignity of men and women, and the necessity of overcoming and doing away with 'every type of discrimination regarding fundamental rights' (Gaudium et Spes, 29). It is in the light of this truth that one can seek to understand better the teaching that women cannot receive priestly ordination. A correct theology can prescind neither from one nor from the other of these doctrines, but must hold the two together; only thus will it be able to deepen our comprehension of God's plan regarding woman and regarding the priesthood -- and hence, regarding the mission of woman in the Church. If however, perhaps by allowing oneself to be conditioned too much by the ways and spirit of the age, one should assert that a contradiction exists between these two truths, the way of progress in the intelligence of the faith would be lost."

Benedict's comments were written in support of the pastoral letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, issued by Pope John Paul II in 1994, in which the late pope stated, "I declare that the Church has no authority (emphasis added) whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful." However, John Paul II's claim, and Benedict's support for the doctrine that the Church has "no authority" to ordain women is specious at best. The claim that Jesus selected only male disciples is based upon a selective reading of scripture and other documents describing his teachings and those who followed him during his time in Israel. In the end, the Church establishes its own authority and to lay this inherently sexist practice at the feet of Jesus Christ is a shameful and cowardly dodge. It gives the lie to Benedict's claim that the Church stands for and supports "the equal personal dignity of men and women". Actions speak louder than words, and the Church's actions with regard to womenpriests is deafening.

Which brings us to the question of interfaith relations between the Church and non-Catholic religions and faith traditions. In reacting to Central Reform's decision to host this event, Rev. Vincent Heir, "who directs the Catholic Church's interfaith efforts in St. Louis, said the archdiocese will not participate in any more interfaith events if Central Reform Congregation is 'a leading player.'" Fair enough. I would posit, though, that members of the Jewish faith could choose to grandstand on a similar point of procedure with regard to the Church's teaching that outside the Church there is no salvation. In order for true dialogue to occur, interfaith or otherwise, all parties must regard the other or others as equals. The Church's insistence on a self-referential position of superiority to all other faiths, Christian and non-Christian alike, precludes this necessary ingredient for dialogue and relationship.

Throughout its history the Church has stubbornly held fast to its teachings, for both good and for ill. For example, in recent memory the Church provided brave and steadfast leadership on questions of economic justice and society's moral obligation to address the material needs of the poor. However, honesty compels us to acknowledge that the Church has also been on the wrong side of some of history's most epochal human rights issues:

• The Spanish Inquisition was approved by the Vatican in 1481. By the time the Vatican ordered that the Inquisition cease in 1834, approximately 5,000 "heretics" had been executed. These, along with thousands of other Inquisition victims, endured unspeakable torture in the name of Catholic purity.

• The 15th Century saw the publication of three separate papal bulls that established the foundation for the imperialistic invasion of the New World by Catholic European nations and the enslavement of indigenous peoples by their Catholic conquerors. (It should be noted that these bulls remain in good standing to this day.):
  • Dum Diversas (1452)
  • Romanus Pontifex (1455)
  • Inter Caetera (1493)

• Physicist, astronomer and mathematician Galileo Galilei was officially tried as a heretic in 1633 for advancing the notion of heliocentricism. As a condition of his sentence, his body of written work remained banned in its entirety until 1718, 76 years after his death. His work remained heavily censored by the Church until 1835, when all versions of Galileo's works were stricken from the Vatican's Index Librorum Prohibitorum ("List of Prohibited Books"). It wasn't until 1992 (350 years after Galileo's death) that any pope (in this case, John Paul II) apologized on the Vatican's behalf for the treatment that Galileo and his work had received from the Church.

These historical references are offered as evidence of the fact that the Church can and has reversed its teaching on matters of great social significance. The worrisome characteristic of these reversals is the fact that in each case it took the Church hundreds of years to reach the conclusion that it was wrong. The damage had already been done after such a great length of time. How many victims might have been spared torture and execution had the Church not waited to halt the Inquisition? How might the indigenous peoples of Central, Latin and South America and Africa have fared, and even fare today, had the Church not provided ecclesiastical sanction for the subjugation and enslavement of native lands and peoples? And, if the Church is wrong about the ordination of women priests and its sole role as the arbiter of human salvation, why should anyone have to wait 300 more years before the Church finally reverses its respective positions on these issues?

- Doug L.

A New Model of Priestly Ministry: Roman Catholic Womenpriests


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE:

Roman Catholic Womenpriests.org

Central Reform Congregation, St. Louis, MO

Whacky story of the week: Female rabbi hosts "ordination" of priestettes (Ignatius Insight Scoop, November 7, 2007)

Religion and Ethics Newsweekly: Mary Magdalene (PBS.org, November 21, 2003)

The 'ordination' of 'womenpriests', by Donna O'Connor-Hunnisett, O.C.D.S. (Catholic Insight.com, October, 2005)

Divorced from Reality, by Dennis O'Brien (CommonwealMarch 11, 2005)

Pope Benedict Argues Catholic Church "Purified" Indigenous Peoples (BlackCommentator.com, June 18, 2007)

Vatican Ban on Women Priest Is Infallible, by Paul Likoudis (Challenge Magazine January, 1996)

Apostolic Letter Ordinato Sacrdotalis of John Paul II to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone (The Vatican, May 22, 1994)

Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women (The Vatican, June 29, 1995)