 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
by Carroll Stuhlmueller, C.P.
from Women and Priesthood:
Future Directions, pp. 25-45.
edited by Carroll Stuhlmueller, C.P. The
Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota.
Republished on our website with
the necessary permissions
CARROLL STUHLMUELLER, C.P., Professor of Old
Testament Studies, completed doctoral work at the Pontifical Biblical
Institute, Rome. Besides publications, he has lectured in the U.S. and abroad,
including l'Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem. In 1957 he was teaching in the first
graduate school of theology for women in U.S. (St. Mary's College, Notre Dame,
Ind.) and since then has been researching the topics of religious leadership
and the role of women in the Church.
The
Old Testament is the inspired word of God, yet a continuous debate questions
its force for deciding religious issues today.(10 Particularly with
controversial topics the Hebrew Bible lacks the decisive strength of the New
Testament. In discussing that most unsettled topic of women priests, writers
tend to bypass those very scriptures (2) which Jesus and His first disciples
relied upon very heavily.(3) Moreover, during the early patristic age, the Old
Testament style of priesthood sharpened or even imposed some very clear lines
upon the Christian image of priest.(4)
This
chapter avoids the simple route of transferring the qualities of Old Testament
priesthood to our own priestly leadership. Nor will we delay over the religious
role of women in the centuries before Christ, in order to discover Biblical
models for women priests today.(5) In fact, a gap so deep and extensive
separates the Old Testament from our late twentieth century,(60 that quick,
thoughtless leaps from ancient biblical times to our own can be disastrous. For
that matter, neither is it wise for us to copy slavishly the religious forms of
New Testament times,(7) nor to condemn our ways if they do not literally
conform to biblical details.(8)
Roman
Catholic theology and practise have always emphasized the necessity to read the
Scriptures within the life setting and pastoral needs of the Church of each new
age.9 Change does not come easily to this Church, but change it does, even as
dramatically as at Vatican II. Within the twenty centuries of its evolution the
Catholic Church has kept its roots imbedded in the Scriptures—maybe at
times too tenuously, but firmly since 1943 10—yet its foliage and seasonal
changes are adapted to the environment and geography of later centuries. The
question before us now is simply this: is the ordination of women to full
priesthood one of these adaptations, imperative for a strong, pastoral ministry
today? (11)
All
the chapters of this book study the priesthood as it evolved in its
theology and ideals, practise and regulations. The eighteen hundred or more
years of Old Testament history provide the ideal setting for investigating the
evolution of religion with its slow progress and quick transitions, its
confrontation and overreactions, its challenges and responses, its set-backs
and collapses, its continual renewal and basic continuity. In the first and
somewhat lengthy section of this chapter we present some general but very
important data about the origin and development of religious forms in ancient
Israel, crucial for theological development of any age and certainly applicable
to the question of women priests. The second part of this chapter traces in
broad outline the origin and principal stages of Old Testament priesthood under
internal and external pressures. Finally, we inquire into the impact of
biblical symbolism upon priesthood today.(12)
I
In
Old Testament times styles of leadership were never revealed directly and
immediately by God.(13) Every form of exercising authority, be it religious or
civil, that is represented in the Hebrew Bible, can also be found in
extra-biblical sources where it antedates Abraham (1850 B.C.) and Moses (1240
B.C.). We conclude then that God did not dictate the institutions of judge or
king, prophet or elder, priest or sage. Yet, God was directing the process by
which Israel was formed into a nation with lines of authority, and led forward
in her history. The record of the legislation and history is called the
inspired word of God, the Holy Bible. After giving a number of examples how
Israel absorbed culture and forms of leadership from her neighbors, we will
look into the way such “pagan” material became the word of God.
This
interaction of religion and culture in Old Testament times can direct the
Church today. Many important movements, like women’s liberation,
originates and develops outside the Church, at least outside the Catholic
priesthood and episcopacy. As the Church begins to adopt these non-religious
movements, we can turn to the Old Testament for guidance and peace. In such a
multiple relationship of conflict, challenge and assimilation, the Old
Testament indicates how God’s will is learned and implemented.
Israel’s institutions, we say, originated in surrounding polytheistic
cultures. At times the Bible openly admits this fact. Several examples will aid
our discussion.
One
of the first historical manifestations of priesthood occurs in Genesis 14:
Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread and wine, and being a priest of
God Most High, he blessed Abram. (Gen 14:18)
While
this chapter has many difficulties, its significance cannot be overlooked.(14)
Centuries before Moses had formally established the levitical priesthood, a
priest from Canaanite stock blessed Moses’ ancestor, Abraham. Later, one
of the royal Davidic titles granted to the crown prince on the occasion of his
coronation was ‘“priest forever according to the order of
Melchizedek” (Ps 110:4).(15) This title, originally of a pagan king,
absorbed more and more of Israel’s messianic hopes, especially at
Qumran(16) and later in the Epistle to the Hebrews.(17) In each of these cases
politics, even at times on an international scale, provided the setting and
catalyst for a vigorous religious development of the Melchizedek title. In
fact, chapter 14 of Genesis, where the title first appears, opens with a
military invasion. Therefore, when priesthood is first introduced, it was
already a fully developed institution, worthy of Israel’s chosen ancestors
and influential in the long political-religious struggle of God’s people.
Another institution which became a carrier of great messianic expectations was
the Davidic dynasty. Royalty, however, was not anticipated by Moses, and the
first movement towards monarchy admitted its foreign origin.
All
the elders came in a body to Samuel at Ramah and said to him, ‘’Now
that you are old, and your sons do not follow your example appoint a king over
us, as other nations have, to judge us.’ (l Sam 8:4-5)
Even
though Samuel opposed the monarchy, nonetheless, he accepted the action of the
elders as indicative of the Lord’s will and arranged a compromise and
anointed Saul and later David as a prince or nagid.(18) David later
assumed the title of king or melek. Through another prophet, Nathan, God
blessed David with extraordinary promises: “Your throne and your kingdom
shall endure forever before me; your throne shall stand firm forever” (2
Sam 7:16).(19) A dynasty, born of political expediency and furthered by
military might and charming diplomacy, eventually collapsed under the fierce
Babylonian invasion. After August 587 B.C., no king ruled from Jerusalem. The
divine promises had to be spiritualized and redirected in a way never
anticipated by earlier traditions. (20) Divinely sanctioned institutions could
disappear in their original form and surface again in styles never foreseen in
their first endorsement.(21)
Two
other, very important developments—prophecy and wisdom— were also
absorbed into Israelite life from foreign sources. The first extended discourse
about a prophet occurs when the Moabite king Balak ben Zippor summoned Balaam
ben Beor from Pethor on the Euphrates (Numbers ch 20-24). The origins of wisdom
from outside Israeliate religious tradition is disclosed, not only in its
almost exclusively secular interests (1 Kings 5:9-14; Prov (10-31) but also in
the geographical origin of many of its great patrons: “Agur teen Jakeh the
Massaite" (Prov 30:1); “Eliphaz the Temanite” (Job
4:1); “Bildad the Shukite” (Job 8:1); “Zophar the
Naamathite” (Job 11:1). (22)
All
of these major movements of the Old Testament were so thoroughly integrated
within Israel’s religious life and traditions that they will appear
elsewhere in the Bible as the object of a direct revelation. In other words,
the foreign origin was later forgotten and the whole movement was attributed
solely to God. The Scriptures, in fact, make quite a habit of overlooking
secondary causes and of attributing everything directly to God.(23)
A
good example of such a development is present in the highly esteemed order of
“elders.” In the Sinai desert the older tribal system of government
by the “head of the family” (24) was breaking down. Moses’
father-in-law, Jethro, a Midianite priest, bluntly told Moses that “you
are not acting wisely.” “Moses followed the advice of his
father-in-law and did all that he suggested. He picked out able men” and
appointed them judges or elders (Ex 18:13-27).
The
traditions in the Book of Numbers, however, much later and more religiously
imbued, leave the impression of a direct revelation from God:
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Assemble for me seventy of the elders of
Israel, men you know for true elders and authorities among the people, and
bring them to the meeting tent. When they are in place beside you, I will come
down and speak with you there. I will also take some of the spirit that is on
you and will bestow it on them, that they may share the burden of the people
with you. You will then not have to bear it by yourself.”(Num
11:16-17)(25)
This
order of “elders’’ continues in the Bible down to the
presbyteros of the New Testament (26) and into later Christian usage
which adapted this word for its “priests.” While divine wisdom
reaches from end to end mightly and governs all things well” (Wis 8:1),
still the immediate occasion lay in the pagan priest Jethro and his common
sense advice to a young and over-zealous son-in-law.
These
examples hopefully will suffice to point out a pattern in the
“revelation” of civil and religious leadership, important for our
theme of women priests. God expected his people: first, to learn from the
experience and sound advice of their surrounding culture, even if it was
idolatrous; second, to allow for cultural and even unexpected developments
within each institution; third, to see His holy will operative in the political
and economic factors responsible for the developments.(27) These same
principles functioned in the early apostolic church and throughout church
history. They offer a model for a development of ordained priesthood today
which would open all offices of service to capable women as is being
done in secular society.
Today
when there is an insufficient number of male, celibate priests, another
“Jethro” is appearing from outside the religious community and
telling church leaders with equal bluntness:
You
are not acting wisely . . . . You will surely wear yourself out, and not only
yourself but also these people with you. The task is too heavy for you; you
cannot do it alone. Now listen to me, and I will give you advice that God may
be with you. (Ex 18:17-19)
Jethro continues: “Choose able and God-fearing” women,
“trustworthy” women, “who hate dishonest gain.... Let these
render decisions” and lead in prayer—an adaptation of Ex 18:21-22.
Transitions such as this, motivated by secular movements need not disturb the
church, as throughout biblical times styles of religious authority originated
and developed under impetus from outside Israel or outside her priesthood. In
fact, the Bible goes so far as to warn the Church that she has no competency to
create structures and institutions ex nihilo (out of nothing)—2
Macc 7:28; she can only learn and adapt them from the surrounding world. The
Bible moreover witnesses to an extraordinary development of institutions, once
accepted within the religious organization. These models of biblical life offer
clear directives for an evolution of priesthood today which would break its
long tradition of male-only ordination and open the ranks to women. When women
outside the church can rise to the highest posts of authority and can exert
strong, beneficial leadership, biblical precedent would not only permit but
urge the church to absorb such a movement within her own lines of authority.
The
many cultural transitions of Old Testament times took place within a country of
only six thousand square miles with no more space than the state of New Jersey
and much less arable soil. The church today occupies the globe which may be one
world and yet manifests an extraordinary variety of cultures. A world wide
church must adapt itself to each situation so that its emphases in
doctrine and morals as well as its sty/es of leadership and its
prophetic stance for the oppressed will vary greatly. If women have acquired
more respectable and productive roles of leadership in some areas of the world
than they have in others then the Church is expected to absorb the progress of
women according to each country or district where she is present. The Church
today has to live at once the many styles of organization spread over a longer
period of time in the Old Testament period.
There
is another principle or norm (besides relieving the burdens of the overworked
priest!!) which the Old Testament offers in the controversial question of women
ordination. This position will be more acceptable to the mood and ethics of our
contemporary world. In the Bible priesthood underwent an extraordinary
development through the impact of the prophets, who championed the rights of
the poor and the unprotected “minority.” The women movement today is
itself the voice of a minority group. By ordaining women the prophet’s
voice would add a new tone and quality to the words of the priest. The
Church’s teaching and liturgy would then more effectively sharpen the
conscience of all Catholics to the suffering of neglected or persecuted people.
A
quick historical survey of Israel’s religion will enable us first to
appreciate the role of the “classical prophets” in biblical times and
then to recognize their image today in the movement of women for religious
leadership and for priesthood.
Around 1200 B.C.Moses organized the disspirited and enervated slaves of Pharaoh
into a unified people with tradition, laws and governmeet. Authority tended to
be vested in gifted individuals, like Moses and Joshua, who were not
necessarily succeeded by their own sons or relatives. Moses, nonetheless, did
set up an institution of elders for civil matters (Ex 18:13-27) and he chose
his own tribe of Levi for religious instruction and worship.
After
Moses’ death and the settlement of the Promised Land, a complementary and
sometimes rival form of religious leadership appeared in the charismatic bands
or communities, simply called “prophets” in the Bible. These are to
be distinguished from the “classical” prophets, individuals like Amos
or Jeremiah with books to their name, who at first denied the name
“prophet” and were not associated with any band or community.(28)The
charismatic groups first show up in 1Sam l0:5-6. clearly distinguishable in
lifestyle and work. Later in 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 6 the characteristics of
their organization become still more evident. They shared many qualities with
the Canaanite prophets; the two groups, nonetheless, opposed one another, even
violently (1 Sam 19:2224; 1 Kings 18). These “charismatic prophets”
became ever more popular and powerful. They acquired the right to anoint or
depose kings (2 Kings 9) and stood next to the royal throne as advisors
directing the wave of the future (2 Sam 7).
Because many abuses surfaced among the charismatic prophets, a change was
necessary. God summoned a whole new series of prophets: we give them the name
“classical prophets.”(29) The first of them, Amos. was determined not
to be associated even by name with the other group. He even denied to be a
prophet or a member of any prophetic band (Am 7:10-15). Such was his
non-conformity that king and high priest banished him, prodded into action by
the ladies and gentlemen whom Amos lashed with his bitter, sarcastic tongue
(cf., Amos 4:1-3; 6:1-8).
AIthough rejected by the institution, Amos developed his preaching within the
larger context of Israel’s traditions. At first in angrily championing of
the rights of the poor (Amos 4:1; 5:7-15), he seemed to be profaning sacred
places and people (4:4-5; 7:16-17) as well as denying sacred traditions (3:2,
12; 5:18; 9:7). Actually, Amos was making the “heart of the matter”
more visible as a reforming power in people’s lives and in the
institutional forms of religion.(30) To be a chosen people, he insisted, did
not consist simply in biological birth from Abraham’s stock (Amos 3:2):
one must also manifest Abraham’s justice, humility and kindness, as
another prophet Micah declared (Mic 6:8). The promised “Day of the
Lord” can turn into darkness if that be the only way to sweep away pride
and oppression (Amos 5:18).
If
Amos had simply repeated traditional theology by rote, then he would have been,
according to a recent work of James A. Sanders among “false prophets [who]
invoked an otherwise decently good theology but at the wrong time, supporting
leaders and people when they needed a challenge.”(31) Amos’ challenge
was remembered. Who could ever forget his sentences, at once brilliant,
sarcastic, devastating and crude? They were gathered together into convenient
blocks or sermonettes, producing one of the most orderly books of the
Bible.(32) The prophet, “excommunicated" by the priest Amaziah, is
incorporated within the Bible by postexilic priests at Jerusalem!
Prophecy and priesthood merge in still another way than by priestly editing and
accepting of prophet’s words. During the Babylonian exile and particularly
in the early postexilic period, between 539 and 400 B.C., the prophets Ezekiel,
Haggai, Zechariah and Joel turned out to be quite different from their
predecessors.(33) Some were priests, others preoccupied with priestly matters.
The book of this late period closest in form and spirit to pre-exilic prophecy
is that of Malachi, yet here again the prerogatives of the levitical priesthood
are seriously defended (Mal 2:1-9) and the site of messianic fulfillment, where
the prophet Elijah will suddenly appear, is the temple (Mal 3:1).
Looking back on this development, we see that organizational leadership will
always need its “’Amos.’’ At first it will usually oppose
such spontaneous unconventional leaders, but if the prophet perseveres,
remaining in the council of the Lord (Jer 23:18, 22) and within the community
of Israel, even through agony and destruction as did Jeremiah (Ch 39-40), then
their ministry will be absorbed within the structure of traditional
leadership.(34) Charismatic authority will be institutionalized, while more
ancient structures will be radically transformed.
The
example of Old Testament prophecy, as studied here, has provided us with one
example among many how a priestly institution can be challenged and eventually
enriched by loyal, prophetic opposition. The steps in biblical times consisted
in prophet, disciples, remembered words, accepted tradition, book of prophecy.
The movement which began as a bitter challenge and even a condemnation of
priesthood eventually produced a prophetic priesthood. For today the steps
might be summarized thus: the women movement in society at large; its prophetic
challenge to church authority; a growing number of disciples within the
movement; articles and books which document the movement and direct its
progress; hesitancy, rejection, re-study and gradual acceptance by church
authority; incorporation within Church law with an enriched form of priesthood.
Such
a new prophetic priesthood does not simply reproduce the former manner of
priestly life and activity, but manifests new models within the traditional
structures. Women aspiring to ordained priesthood do not want to take over the
position of the male priests, robe themselves in the same vestments and
function in the same way.(35) Rather, they look towards an enlarged,
diversified priesthood. with a particular outreach to minorities.
Up
till now we have remained almost exclusively on the historical plane in
discussing the interaction of Old Testament religion with surrounding cultures.
We now turn the coin to its theological side and seek the religious
principle by which Israel discerned what and how to accept from the culture of
her neighbors. An intuition about God’s personal love, breathed by divine
initiative into Israel, enabled her to choose what was fitting, to purify and
even transform it and then to turn it into something quite different from its
expression outside of her own community.(36)
Before Israel could react to God’s goodness on her own initiative, she had
to be called into existence. It was this part of the Lord’s personal love
which gave birth to a people uniquely His own, distinct from all other nations.
This idea of a chosen people is expressed with tender eloquence:
Tell the Israelites: You have seen for yourselves how I treated the Egyptians
and how I bore you up on eagle wings and brought you here to myself. Therefore,
if you hearken to my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my special
possession, dearer to me than all other people, though all the earth is mine.
You shall be to me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation. That is what you must
tell the Israelites. (Ex 19:4-6)
First, we notice that in His goodness God intervened and called Israel in
the midst of her history. She was already a part of the ancient Near
Eastern fertile crescent, manifesting the cultural strengths and weaknesses of
its inhabitants. Deuteronomy ch 26 expressed it this way in a very early credal
statement: “My father was a wandering Aramean who went down to Egypt ,
while another credo in Joshua ch 24 admits: ”In times past your
fathers, down to Terah, father of Abraham and Nahor, dwelt beyond the river and
served other gods." With loving concern God then accepted the people as they
were not only at the starting point of salvation history, but also at each
new transition along the way.
lsrael, as a result, was always conscious of a forward movement in her
theology. No matter where she was, God would be there, living among His people,
beckoning them onward. Naturally, she looked backward to great moments of
salvation, yet the past was not considered the golden model which every
subsequent age must reconstruct.(370 Rather, the past was being relived with
new and greater possibilities. In historical continuity with her past, Israel
was able to fulfill ancient hopes with dramatic leaps forward (cf., Is
43:18-19; 48:3, 6b-S, 11-12).38
At
the roots of her origin and major developments, Israel was radically different
from her neighbors. All other peoples traced their origin to the founding of
their city and especially of their temple. Here on great feastdays, especially
New Years, they celebrated the act of creation, primeval paradise and first
innocence.(390 Israel, instead, commemorated her freedom from sin, slavery and
oppression and awaited a new creation in the future. With the non-Israelites
the gods came to be regarded as omnipotent powers, following the seasons of the
year, yet like weather capable of erratic change and uncontrollable violence.
Seldom if ever do these gods sustain a prolonged personal interest in the
people, and in these cases the object of their divine concern must be of noble,
if not of royal blood.
Religion outside the Bible did manifest a limited forward vision, that winter
shall be followed by a new spring or that victory shall crown a military
expedition. Yet, no surge of life nor any triumph in battle could ever equal
first creation with its explosive energy, its titantic struggle of the gods,
and its idyllic first paradise. Non-Israelite religions then sought balance and
fertility in nature, victory in war, protection against evil spirits, wisdom to
anticipate and control life’s fortunes and misfortunes. Basically,
non-Israelite religion attempted to placate divine powers and so to recover as
much as was humanly possible of primeval paradise. Israel’s
religion, on the contrary, provided the liturgical and moral opportunities to
respond to God’s personal love and to await a new paradise
beyond human possibilities.
The
essential difference between Israel’s religion and that of her neighbors
helps to explain Israel’s determination that her future must be far
superior to anything experienced in the past and that this mysterious
development is to be instilled, furthered and finally accomplished by the
Lord’s very personal love for His people. Israel’s normal evolution,
therefore, was bound to spring many surprises which only afterwards
would be perceived in continuity with the country’s previous history!
At
important transitions Israel was often shocked into the reality of what God can
do: destroy Jerusalem and wipe out the Davidic dynasty, bring an end to such
noble institutions as judgeship and prophecy, build a new people out of the
catastrophe of the exile and grant unrivaled authority to priests (Neh 8-13;
Zech 6:11) and later to the Maccabean-Hasmoneans, a non-Davidic and
non-Zadokite family (1 Mac 10:21). Furthermore, all of Israel’s
institutions were seen as absorbed into the mystery of God, the Davidic dynasty
acquired such honorific titles as “Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero,
Father-Forever, Prince of Peace” (Is 9:5). Wisdom was the Lord’s
“firstborn, . . . poured forth at the first, before the earth’’
(Prov 8:22-23). Prophecy was present, standing “in the council of the
Lord” (Jer 23: 18).
This
basic attitude of the devout Israelite—continuity with overwhelming
surprise, leading to a future golden age—meant that all institutions, once
taken over from their pagan neighbors, were no longer controlled by a past
model ab initio but were open to surprising developments. As we saw
earlier, these developments happened within the societal, military and
political interlocking of Israel’s life; yet they were interpreted as the
mirabilia Dei, God’s wondrous works. Israel, consequently, was able
to survive cataclysmic disasters and still trust God.
Her
prophet thus enunciated God’s oracle:
See, I am doing something new !
Now it springs forth, do you
not perceive it? (Is 43:19)
A
disciple of this prophet wrote still more excitedly:
Oh,
that you would rend the heavens and come down, . . . .
While you wrought
awesome deeds we could not hope for,
such as they had not heard of from of
old.
No ear has ever heard, no eye ever seen, any God but you
doing
such deeds for those who wait for Him. (Is 63: 19; 64:2-3)
Lines
such as these ought not to be interpreted simply of Jesus’ incarnation,
but rather of what is to happen consistently in Israel’s future which is
also ours.
These
wonders are not ostentatious impersonal deeds. They center upon the Lord’s
intimate presence among a hungry, discouraged people. This concern of the Lord
for the needy is very evident in the larger context of Is 63:7-64:11, just
quoted.
If we
apply this Old Testament model to the question of Catholic priesthood and the
ordination of women, the following conclusions emerge for our serious
consideration.
First, the church today like Israel in Old Testament times consists of a people
on a journey.(40) True, a very important difference separates church and
synagogue, in that the fulness of hopes is manifest in Jesus. “He is the
pledge of our inheritance, the first payment against the full redemption of a
people God has made His own” (Eph 1: 14). Yet, the full details and the
perfect blueprint of church structure were not revealed in Jesus’ lifetime
nor during the apostolic era. This fact is apparent in Paul’s struggles
for the acceptance of Gentile converts and for church unity (cf., Gal; 1-2
Cor). The same openness to future re-structuring becomes evident in the
significant transition to a more monarchical form immediately after the
close of New Testament writings. The Catholic Church, moreover, has modified
the functions of sacred orders, has totally dropped such an important New
Testament order as “prophet,” and has granted extraordinary power to
non-biblical offices like patriarch and cardinal. Again, the evolutionary
journey of ordained priesthood to include women would follow this theology of a
migrant church.
Second, throughout the Bible as in any world culture continuity provides a most
valuable ingredient for survival and development. Yet, within Israel’s
continuity, dramatic transitions occurred, so overpowering that at their first
announcement by the prophets, not even the major religious authorities
understood and accepted the message (Jer 7:26) and the prophets themselves were
baffled (Jer 12: 1-5) and terrified (Jer 4: 1921). Such threatening oracles and
fearful experiences turned out to be the only way continuity was possible, at
least continuity worthy of God’s ideals.
Today
the Church needs to consider how to enrich her tradition by new movements as
the ordination of women. True, many members of the Church will respond
negatively, as though sacred traditions were being violated and cultural
patterns upset. Their reactions must be taken into consideration on the very
principle being discussed here of God’s loving concern for each of His
people. Nonetheless, traumatic upset in one part of the Church is not
necessarily a proof of God’s displeasure. Furthermore, one of the
qualities of intimate love is to take the loved one by surprise! Religiously to
live by faith means an availability to God s secret wonders. “Those who
wait upon the Lord renew their strength” (Is 40:31). At this hour when
women have proven their effective leadership in many parts of the secular
sphere, the Church is obliged by biblical precedent to open leadership roles to
them and to await the wonder and the surprise of such a move.
Third, we saw that God directed the development of biblical tradition through a
prophetic concern for the poor and oppressed “minorities.” Most of
Israel’s spectacular changes were announced as a necessary response to
oppression: Moses’ leading the Israelite slaves out of Egypt; the
prophetic oracles leveled against Jerusalem because the “orphan” and
the “widow" were mistreated (Is 1:16). Today “women” constitute
one of the oppressed minorities. If the Church cannot move to visible
leadership in furthering the full and equal rights of women in all areas of
church authority, other prophets will raise the alarm and summon the invader
(Jer 4:5ff).
Finally, if the church combines a strong piety towards the person of Jesus with
her prophetic rage to defend the oppressed, then she will be able to direct and
purify any new developments like women ordination. In fact, the church’s
experience will provide respectability to the prophetic movement; her
traditions will modify excesses and best of all her continuous concern for
all the oppressed will prevent this movement from hurting anyone within
the church.
II
Our
study now turns to the history of Old Testament priesthood.(41) Not much is
gained for our purposes here from presenting ancient facts within their ancient
setting, but it will be beneficial to observe how divine revelations about
priesthood were seriously modified in later periods. The church may find a
model here in the Old Testament for authorizing important changes in what was
considered up till now a divine order to restrict priesthood to the male sex.
In
the Old Testament the differences between one age to another in revealed
doctrine could be very pronounced. An unguarded reader might even charge the
Bible guilty of error or at least of contradicting itself, if he or she did not
appreciate the close relation of biblical revelation with world culture and its
adaptation to new cultural situations. Even when earlier inspired texts seemed
to have closed the case and ended theological development—i.e.,
that the Davidic dynasty would reign always from Jerusalem (2 Sam 7:16)
— still new changes were sanctioned by the authority of God’s word.
These alterations were eventually absorbed within tradition and seen in
continuity with the past. One of the stylistic ways to regroup under tradition
was the genealogical tablet.(42)
These
tablets of names (43) served a much wider purpose than to follow biological
origins. They could substantiate some major political or sociological changes,
as when the Kenizzites, originally non-Israelites from the line of Esau (Gen
36:11, 15) were absorbed within the tribe of Judah, son of Esau’s twin
brother, Jacob, and given full rights.(44) The table of nations in Gen 10
served a political and religious purpose: the fulfillment of God’s promise
to Noah and his sons, “be fertile and multiply and fill the earth”
(Gen 9:1), viewed Israel’s salvation “exclusively within the realm of
history," (450 a history reflecting the crucial political period “between
the end of the eighth and the end of the seventh centuries.” (46)
Historical events, then, as described in the Bible, become carriers of a
profound pastoral theology closely linked with peoples’ needs and hopes.
We propose to look at the complicated history of Old Testament priesthood in
order to clarify the theology and to draw parallels for theological development
within Catholic priesthood today.
As
mentioned already, Moses presided over the formation of civil and religious
institutions. He bestowed special privileges upon his own tribe of Levi.
up till then under a curse for its violence and betrayal of trust (cf., Gen
49:5-7); Levi was to be principally responsible for teaching and for conducting
liturgical ceremonies (cf., Deut 33:8-11).(47) After Moses’ death, these
“Mushite” Levites,(48) as scholars refer to them in distinction from
others who were later admitted to the ranks of Levi, were in charge of the
sanctuary at Shiloh in central Palestine and cared for the Ark of the Covenant
(Judg 20:27-28; 1 Sam 1-4).
It
was more normal for religious duties to be confided to the Levites, but
non-Levites could and did function as priests (Judg 17:5; 1 Sam 7:1; 2 Sam
8:18). It was due to politics and military might that David’s sons
performed priestly acts (2 Sam 9:18), that David and his successors after the
conquest of Jerusalem assumed the title of the former Jebusite king of that
city, “Priest forever according to the order of Melichizedek,” that
Solomon sacrificed at the most renowned high place of Gibeon (1 Kings 3:4). In
fact, throughout the books of 2 Samuel and 1-2 Kings, the kings were superior
to the levites installed by Moses and could take their place on very special
occasions.(49)
David
named two high priests: Abiathar, representing the Mushite Levites who were
direct heirs of the Mosaic traditions and the Ark; and Zadok, formerly a
Jebusite priest who converted to the worship of Yahweh and was representative
of the southern group (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25).(50) David similarly installed two
commanders-in-chief, Joab in charge of the northern troops with closer ties to
Moses, and Benaiah in charge of the Cherethites and Pelethites, people with
fragile ties to Moses. Upon his accession to the throne, Solomon removed the
northerners Joab and Abiathar, who unfortunately had sided with the losing
contender, Adonijah. At Solomon’s orders, Adonijah and Joab were executed
and the priest Abiathar was exiled from the Jerusalem court and sent to live at
Anathoth (1 Kings 1:5-8, 38-39; 2:24-25, 26-27, 33-35; cf., Jer 1:1).
From
the death of Solomon in 922 B.C. till the destruction of Samaria in 721 B-C.,
the tribes were divided into two kingdoms, with the Zadokite priests
(originally non-Israelites) in charge of religious functions in the southern
Kingdom of Judah, and with Mushite and non-Mushite Levites functioning in
various sanctuaries of the northern kingdom of Israel. After 721 B.C., all
religious and civil life was concentrated around Jerusalem. During the reform
of King Josiah (640-609 B.C.) the northern or Mushite Levites regained some
power at Jerusalem, but the reform and the Levites’ respectability
collapsed at the king’s tragic death.
During the Babylonian exile (587-539 B.C.) remnants of the two rival
priesthoods each drew up plans for Israel’s return to the Holy Land and
the revival of their own religious institutions. One of these documents is
located in the final draft or redaction of Deuteronomy; the other is found in
what is called the “Priestly’’ or “P” tradition.
Deuteronomy very explicitly defends the equal rights of all levites to
religious services:
When a levite goes from one of your communities anywhere in Israel in which he
ordinarily resides, to visit, as his heart may desire, the place which the Lord
chooses, he may minister there in the name of the Lord, his God, like all his
fellow Levites who are in attendance there before the Lord. He shall then
receive the same portions to eat as the rest, along with his monetary offerings
and heirlooms. (Deut 18 6-8).
Not
only is the part-time levite granted full liturgical privileges at the
sanctuary, but he may also support his family from the “stipends,”
portions of the animal and grain sacrifices and other monetary gifts.
Ezekiel, on the other hand, sided with the Zadokite priests; in fact, he
himself as a priest belonged to their ranks (Ez 1:1). As a venerable leader
around whom the elders gathered (Ez 10:1; 14:1), he threw all his weight into
the statement: “These are the Zakokites, the only Levites who may
come near to minister to the Lord” (Ez 40:46; cf., 43: 19). Then he laid
down the law which reversed the position in Deuteronomy and reduced the other
levites to menial roles of “minor orders”:
But
as for the Levites who departed from me when Israel strayed from me to pursue
their idols, they shall bear the consequences of their sin. They shall serve in
my sanctuary as gate keepers and temple servants; they shall slaughter the
holocausts and the sacrifices for the people, and they shall stand before the
people to minister for them.... They shall no longer draw near me to serve as
my priests, nor shall they touch any of my sacred things. (Ez 44:10-11, 13)
The
final words of this passage deprived these other levites even of their
“stipend.” To clear the records, the Zadokite priests were equally
guilty of idolatry, as Ezekiel admitted in ch 8-10.
Though the development is complex, the main lines ought to be clear. Zadokites,
once not even followers of Moses, became co-equal in the priestly office with
the other levites. Under the strong influence of Ezekiel, they became Levites
with a capital “L” and all the others were reduced to a small
“1" as levites!
Many
conclusions emerge not only about the interaction of priestly leadership with
world forces and internal politics, but also about the process of divine
revelation.
First, history witnesses to a distinct but complicated evolution, at times of
revolutionary force (David’s conquest of Jerusalem, and the establishment
of his dynasty, the adoption of the Zadokites as levitical priests and the
construction of the temple), yet in retrospect these actions were recognized in
a line of continuity with Moses. Notice David’s concern to house the Ark
at Jerusalem (1 Sam 6). Conflict constituted a major ingredient of
theological development. (51)
Second, out of the convoluted interaction of religion and politics, of world
culture and biblical faith, of good and bad motives, God’s word was born
and revelation recorded.
Third, a wide variety of priestly styles are noticeable. Levites were preferred
to lead religious functions, but non-Levites would be chosen, at times
temporarily for the task, particularly if they were gifted for liturgical
ceremonies and for teaching. Levites in the northern Kingdom often had secular
jobs and exercised priesthood only on special occasions when they went up to
the sanctuary “as their heart may desire” (Deut 18:6). Evidently
levites were not automatically chosen but had to prove themselves.
Fourth, while none of the levites possessed landed property,(52) those at
Jerusalem were much more securely ensconced under the king’s good pleasure
and vigilance.
Fifth, Israel’s priesthood reacted sensitively to cultural changes and
political conflicts ending up with a decision interpreted as “divine
revelation. ”
Just
as the patristic age of the church drew rules and expectations from Old
Testament priesthood, especially as it functioned in the late postexilic age,
and applied these qualities to the Catholic priest, we, too, in this our age of
the church can find support and guidance from the same Old Testament in our
search for God’s will in the pastoral development of priesthood. The
absorption of Zadokites and other non-levites into levitical priesthood would
undergird a development towards women-priests and certainly countenance a much
larger ministerial role to women This new change would provide an opportunity
to reconsider other options, such as part-time priests with secular jobs,
occasional functions in priestly work, a more democratic form of exercising
priestly and episcopal authority. This suggestion asks that priesthood be
modeled less upon the authoritarian Zadokites of postexilic Jerusalem (where
the patristic age garnered ideas) and more upon the levites of the preexilic
northern kingdom (where the New Testament disciples of Jesus turned).(53)
These
new visions of priesthood would correspond to the determination of most women,
who in their call to priesthood, want to create new models and life styles
rather than duplicate what is being done now by men priests.
III
Priesthood in both Old and New Testament times functioned within a world of
symbolism. The entire sacramental system of the Church, as mentioned already,
unites the assembly with God through symbols like bread and wine, water and
oil. This focal position of symbol is recognized by the Roman Declaration
in its study on women ordination. Its strongest argument—at least in
the mind of its authors—and certainly its most extensive discussion is
based on sacramental symbolism. “Sacramental signs,” here it is
quoting from St. Thomas, “represent what they signify by natural
resemblance.” The document immediately concludes that “this
‘natural resemblance’ which must exist between Christ and his
minister” would be violated “if the role of Christ were not taken by
a man: in such a case it would be difficult to see in the minister the image of
Christ. For Christ himself was and remains a man” (sec. v).
Because of its importance the question of symbol is discussed from many angles
in this book. Here we inquire into the Old Testament and test the position of
the Declaration on “natural resemblance” against the style of
symbolism in the Holy Scriptures before Christ. In the Old Testament symbols
were formed from the elements of earth and human life. They emerged from
decisive events like the exodus out of Egypt, the journey through the desert
and the crossing of the Jordan River. Symbols included the world of people like
Moses, David and Solomon. Stories like Noah’s flood and Jonah’s
voyage in the belly of the whale take on the status of a continuing symbol,
like the Shakespearean character Macbeth. Every symbol began with something or
someone so real and so impressive, that people began to see in them all sorts
of meaning and power. In some cases, like Noah’s flood, the reality is
difficult to recover from all the stories that have been told about it in the
ancient Near East.
For
people, events and things to develop into symbols, they must be contemplated in
the depth of their existence and then that hidden meaning be expressed in a
striking way, charged with emotion. This expression, now become symbol, may
take its “parent’’ by surprise. Symbols are thus born out of the
past but project mysterious signals of the future. They exemplify parts of our
discussion in section two of this chapter. As many people together contemplate
the exodus or the bread and wine, new depths of meaning are perceived, inner
union achieved, challenges given, the decisions made. These conclusions may be
very subconscious intertwined with will, emotions, memory and desires; as a
result deep contemplative responses are evoked.(54)
The
Old Testament adds another important quality to its symbols, which will be
considerably important in our treatment of women priests. In the Hebrew Bible
it is possible that one set of symbols abound with items which clash with one
another. Especially in the apocalyptic books like Zechariah and Daniel ch 7-12,
but also in an incipient way with Ezekiel ch 1, the composite symbol becomes so
weird that we cannot possibly imagine it, all at one time. Each item must be
taken separately for what it is worth: eyes = visions; wheels = mobility; wings
= swift flight; bull = strength; lion = royal power. Clothing, color, numbers,
celestial bodies and bodily limbs, each has a distinct communication. Yet, they
can be meshed together in one cacophonous conflict of parts to symbolize the
mystery of God beyond human language and even beyond human symbols!
At
times the clash of symbols may so disturb us, that like the prophet Ezekiel we
fall exhausted upon our face (Ez 2:1). At other times the dissonance is more
subtle, as in the prophecy of Hosea. In ch 2-3 the prophet focuses attention
upon a sexual symbol which portrayed the Lord Yahweh as Israel’s spouse.
The New Testament follows with the example of Jesus who compared himself to a
bridegroom in his loving and joyful presence with his disciples (Matt 9:15).
This image of Christ as spouse of the church is developed in 2 Cor 11:2; Eph
5:22-33; Rev 21:9; 22:17. The Declaration refers to this symbol in order
to explain the exclusion of the female sex from priesthood. It insists, as we
saw at the beginning of this section III, upon the “natural
resemblance” of all priests to Jesus’ male sexuality, for they act
in persona Christi.(55)
Hosea’s symbol was drawn from the experience of his marriage, in
particular from the infidelity of his wife. Chapters 1-3 develop this image at
length, with emotional eruptions, profound dejection, vaulting hopes, poignant
tragedy. So acutely did Hosea experience the violent swings of emotional
response, that we almost lose sight of the symbolic value and think only of his
personal tragedy. Chapter two introduces the religious application, sometimes
very quickly as in v 15 (“and she forgot me, says the
Lord”), at other times explicitly as in the mention of Egypt, the
valley of Achor and the covenant (v 17, 20-22).
From
this heartbreaking matrimonial context there was born that rich symbol of
Yahweh, Spouse of Israel. Israel is the adulterous wife, again and again
violating the Lord’s love, yet always received back again. Israel then is
cast in a female image. In the use of this image, however, the Prophet directs
his complaint against the priests and here comes the clash of images—from
female harlot to male priest. “With you is my grievance, O priests.”
“They sin against me, exchanging their glory for shame. They feed on the
sin of my people.” This account reminds us of prostitution where money is
made off of sex. Hosea declares God’s verdict, again with sexual
allusions:
I
will punish them for their ways ....
They shall eat and not be satisfied,
they shall play the harlot but not increase.
Because they have
abandoned the Lord to practise harlotry.
Hosea
saw the image or symbol of his harlot wife fulfilled in the male priests. There
is no question here of homosexuality nor of any sexual offence. Hosea listed
other crimes in ch 4. The priests are “adulterous wives” because of
their excessive wealth, their reliance upon clout, their lax religious spirit,
their routine liturgies. Several times in ch 4 and 5 Hosea moved from female to
male without explanation or transition. Images in the Old Testament can clash
that way.
Other, important examples of such turbulent transfers of images can be seen in
the Old Testament. For instance, “tabernacle” can signify the
“home” or protection which God provided for Israel in the desert or
in the agricultural land of Canaan (Deut 16:13-17). Later it signified the home
which Israel made for God, the temple at Jerusalem (1 Kings 8). Subsequently,
the Jerusalem temple began to symbolize the messianic home which Israel offers
to all the peoples of the earth (Is 2:1-4: Zech 14). In the New Testament
tabernacle means the human body of Jesus (John 2:21), the church (Luke
24:50-53), or heaven (Rev 21:2).56 This enduring and significant symbol never
preserved “a natural resemblance” to its original form of a desert
tent. Even the principal agents change roles, so that sometimes God, at other
times human beings raise up the tabernacle.
This
biblical background to symbol cuts against the position in the Declaration
about “natural resemblance.” The symbolic representation of
Jesus, spouse of the Church, must preserve and communicate not only the
intimate union of life and the fertile reproduction of life, but it must as
well manifest that aura of mystery and conflict involved in such intimacy. It
seems that if the necessity of “natural resemblance” is pushed to its
extreme, then the symbol of Hosea’s marriage would require that Jesus
himself and all priests not only be married but also be victimized by
unfaithful wives! The same ultimate need of “natural resemblance”
would exclude the saints from the church (which is the adulterous spouse),
implicitly deny Mary’s Immaculate Conception, and correspond best with
that false theological system which emphasizes the corrupt nature of all flesh.
Furthermore, an over-emphasis upon “natural resemblance” distorts
other basic qualities inherent in good symbolism. Symbols almost always
transcend their origin and take their parents by surprise. They are born from
the past but point to the future. If priesthood must remain the prerogative of
the male sex because of a natural resemblance to Jesus’ male sexuality as
spouse of the church, then priesthood may fail to point in a striking way to
the future where there will “not exist among you Jew or Greek, slave or
freeman, male or female” (Gal 3:28).
In
heaven each of the elect will certainly maintain a line of continuity with
their earthly personality, grounded in male or female sexuality. Yet heavenly
sexuality will be such that “they neither marry nor are given in marriage
but live like angels in heaven” (Matt 22:30). They will express their
intimate love for one another in a way infinitely more ecstatic than ever on
earth. These heavenly realities of love can be glimpsed not only in the
symbolic banquet of the Eucharist which exceeds any family dinner on earth
(cf., Is 25:6; 54:1-2; Ps 22:72) but also in the priesthood which should
transcend the bounds of earthly sexuality.(57)
Biblical symbolism then not only supports an extension of priesthood to women
but even seems to encourage it.
Conclusions
The
two main areas of Old Testament religion, priesthood and symbolism, discussed
in the second and third sections of this chapter ought to be considered
integrally together, so that one is not applied to priesthood independently of
the other. Secondly, each had its own history or evolution, as did the entire
ancient Near East and individual countries within it like Israel.
Within Israel’s long, complicated history, various symbols rose in
importance, then declined, each at a different rate in various parts of the
country. The symbols of exodus and desert tabernacle were eclipsed by the
symbols of the city Jerusalem and its temple in the south at Jerusalem.
Biblical symbolism, moreover, not only sustained but even delighted in a clash
of images. A major symbol might seem to explode as one image is heaped upon
another, yet the awesomeness of God’s way of salvation, its overwhelming
and uncontrollable mystery are being communicated. Priesthood, too, must not be
tied to any excessive “natural resemblance” but in its unity and
variety it must stir contemplative wonder over the mystery of God’s
transcendent intimacy with his people. Extending the priesthood to women would
follow these biblical norms and accentuate the mysterious presence of
Jesus, wondrous spouse of the Church.
The
rise, fall and revival of symbols depended upon the political and economic
fortunes of Israel and Judah. This close interaction of religious institutions
with historical events was also apparent in Part Two of this chapter. The
institution of priesthood did not follow a single line of biological descent
from the levites and the family of Aaron. Pagan priests like the Zadokites of
pre-Davidic Jerusalem were absorbed within the ranks of the levites and
eventually became the Levites with capital “L”. Catholic priesthood
must also evolve and gather new forms of leadership within its ranks. Women are
just now emerging with strong leadership qualities and for this reason should
be included in priesthood.
While
the second and third sections of this chapter carried the main burden or more
specific aspects of the Old Testament focus on women ordination, the first
section provided basic orientation. Here the crucial point was discussed that
neither in the Bible nor in the Church does divine revelation dictate
distinctive styles of leadership. It is not the competence of Bible or Church
to create forms of authority; and therefore, it is not godly for either Bible
or Church to differ too radically from secular culture in the general
lines or styles of leadership. The Church risks repudiating the cultural
advance of women in many areas of the world, if she refuses them the right to
aspire to the supreme area of leadership, which resides in the priesthood in
its various orders. Not to open priesthood to women may imply that their
social, political and economic advances elsewhere are ungodly and evil. This
serious charge stems from a quality of biblical history where all good
forms of leadership and culture were tried and absorbed within the life of
Israel.(58)
Israel discerned what forms were good and what forms were bad by the intuition
of Yahweh’s personal, compassionate love. This revelation purified and
enhanced whatever was accepted within the chosen people. It exercised its
influence most vigorously in the preaching of prophets who championed the
rights of the poor, the neglected, the “minorities.” Today women
constitute such an oppressed minority. In the secular world, prophets are
sounding the alarm! Their voice must be heard as well in the ranks of the
church. If not, then the Old Testament prophets will cry out again that
Jerusalem be destroyed, so that a renewed Holy City rise from the ruins. If the
warning is heard and God’s voice obeyed, again something new will evolve
without the ordeal of Jerusalem under fire. Prophets do not repeat the past,
however good and orthodox that may have been. They challenge it to be better,
purer and more reflective of God’s personal love for the poor. Ordination
of women might exercise such a profound prophetical impact upon priesthood and
church.
Finally, in the prophetic evolution of symbols and institutions, continuity
with tradition is maintained yet a fresh and vigorous form is most of all in
evidence. Women priests would not simply imitate what the men are doing. They
would introduce the priesthood and Eucharistic piety into new areas of
ministry, with new styles of action, within neglected and non-evangelized
neighborhoods. Women priests will call forth a prophetic spirit within
priesthood. They will diversify and enrich its ranks. With a new enthusiasm,
they will inspire a wide variety of capable people to join the various types of
priesthood, be they religious orders or diocesan groups, male or female.
This
Old Testament hope must be tested against the fuller revelation of the light of
Christ and the long tradition of the church. This we proceed to do in the
following chapters of this book.
Notes
1. D.
L. Baker, Two Testaments: One Bible (Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity
Press, 1976, is valuable for its full bibliography on the Christian
interpretation of the Old Testament; its explanations, however, are inadequate.
For a critical investigation, see Robert B. Laurin, Contemporary Old
Testament Theologians (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1970). For a good
practical example, see Elizabeth Achtemeier, The Old Testament and the
Proclamation of the Gospel (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973) and Lucien
Deiss, God's Word and God's People (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
1976).
2.
The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
totally ignores the Old Testament except for occasional references. These do
not occur in sections 2 and 3, where the Bible is investigated explicitly.
3.
Cf., 2 Tim 3:15-16, '“Likewise, from your infancy you have known
the sacred Scripture (the Old Testament, for Paul is referring to Timothy's
years as a Jew], the source of the wisdom which through faith in Jesus Christ
leads to salvation. All Scripture is inspired of God and is useful for teaching
- for reproof, correction, and training in holiness so that the man of God may
be fully competent and equipped for every good work.” Also Jesus' words in
Matt 5:17-18, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the
prophets. I have come, not to abolish them, but to fulfill them.... Until
heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part of a letter, shall be done
away with until it all comes true. ”
4.
Elements of Old Testament priesthood transferred to Christian priesthood were:
celibacy (in that the Jewish priest had to be continent while functioning at
the altar); perpetual (the Jewish priest was born into the priestly tribe or
family and so retained the priestly office perpetually like his birthright);
separate caste (again by reason of birth in Old Testament times, and in
postexilic times by reason of the theocratic state at Jerusalem); little or no
property (for Old Testament references see fn 52).
5.
Cf., ch. 8, section 1; also Clarence J.Vox, Woman in Old Testament
Worship (Delft: Judels and Brinkman, 1968); J. Edgar Bruns, God as
Woman, Woman as God (New York: Paulist, 1973); J. de Fraine, Women of
the Old Testament (DePere, Wisc: St. Norbert Abbey Press, 1968); A.
Feuillet, “La dignité et le role de la femme d'aprés
quelques textes pauliniens: comparison avec l'Ancien Testament,” New
Testament Studies 21 (1974/ 75) 157-91.
6.
The difficulties of transposing biblical sentences and ideas to our twentieth
century world are eloquently described by D. Nineham, The Use and Abuse of
the Bible (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1977) ch 1 “Introduction:
Cultural Change and Cultural Relativism.” Unfortunately, Nineham fails to
answer his serious problem, principally because he overlooks the ongoing
presence of Israel and Church where biblical traditions are continuously
reinterpreted and where liturgical worship grants an important role of
symbolism. The Report of the Biblical Commission on the ordination of women
admits in its introductory section: “The question asked (Can Women be
Priests?) touches on the priesthood, the celebrant of the eucharist and the
leader of the local community. This is a way of looking at things which is
somewhat foreign to the Bible.”
7.
The Report of the Biblical Commission plainly states its own difficulty:
“Yet one question must still always be asked: What is the normative value
which should be accorded to the practice of the Christian communities of the
first centuries?"
8.
Writers like Hans Küng leave the impression that the ideal form of Church
order is that of 1-2 Corinthians since it's closer to Jesus' lifetime, while
the church administration according to the pastoral epistles represents a later
less perfect form. The earliest forms are not necessarily purer and closer to
the will of Jesus but represent one model among others from which the church of
any age can draw upon for its own effective pastoral ministry.
9. Cf, Vatican II, Dei Verbum (Apostolic
Constitution on Divine Revelation), ch 2 no 8, ''This tradition (expressed in a
special way in the inspired books) which comes from the apostles develops in
the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This
happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure
these things in their hearts (cf. Lk. 2:19, 51), through the intimate
understanding of spiritual things they experience, and through the preaching of
those who have received through episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.
For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward
toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete
fulfillment in her."
10. The date 1943 marks the issuance of Pius XII's
encyclical magna carta on biblical studies, Divino Afflante Spiritu. It
should be pointed out that the three most important documents on the Bible come
from Pius XII and from Paul VI. Under the latter's pontificate, Vatican II's
Constitution on Divine Revelation was released. Earlier, on April 21, 1964, in
the first year after his election, he approved an Instruction on the
Historical Truth of the Gospels certainly reflecting the most up-to-date
scientific study on the formation of the gospels.
11. The Declaration confined itself almost
exclusively to the theological question of women ordination. Because the Bible
itself is primarily a pastoral document and because here lies the principal
competency of the church and magisterium, the Declaration would have
been more convincing had it addressed itself to the readiness of the church for
this type of change in priesthood and the effect of such upon the sanctifying
mission of church leaders.
12. Because Roman Catholic priesthood is closely
connected with sacramental and especially eucharistic liturgies, the proper
understanding of symbols is crucial. Sac raments are invalid, if symbols are
broken (i.e., to use milk instead of water for baptism); they can be valid and
yet productive of little good if the symbolism is poorly expressed (i.e., to
administer the Eucharist with haste and anger, or to fail in integrating the
Eucharist with the liturgy of the Word).
13. On this point, our study differs from a statement in
the Declaration, sec. 6, par. 35: ''Thus one must note the extent to
which the Church is a society different from other societies, original in her
nature and in her structures." — The position of this chapter, that basic
styles of leadership were not immediately revealed by God but were found
pre-existing among neighboring peoples is substantiated by the classic study of
Roland de Vaux, O.P., Ancient Israel (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961),
available in a two-volume paperback. The French title indicates the subject
matter more accurately: Les Institutions de L'Ancien Testament.
14. G. von Rad, Genesis (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1973) 175, writes: "This chapter contains some of the most
difficult and most debated material in the patriarchal history, indeed, in the
entire historical part of the Old Testament." At first it seems that this
chapter can be removed from the book of Genesis and the entire narrative
proceeds even more smoothly. Yet, many of its details have been corroborated in
the startling discoveries at Ebla in NW Syria according to an oral report of
Mitchell Dahood at the annual convention of the Catholic Biblical Association,
Detroit Michigan, August 16-19, 1977.
15. Cf., Leopold Sabourin, The Psalms, 2
ed (New York: Alba House, 1974) 358.
16. Cf., J. A. Fitzmyer, "Further Light on
Melchizedek from Qumran Cave 11," JBL 86(1967) 25-41.
17. Cf., David M. Hay, Glory at the Right
Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity (Nashville: Abingdon, 1973).
18. For the difficulties of the transition from the
leadership of the judges to that of royalty, difficulties which are reflected
as well in the complex text of 1 Samuel with its pro- and anti-monarchic texts,
see J. Blenkinsopp in the New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (New
York: Nelson 1969) p 305-7; or W. Wifall, The Court History of Israel
(St. Louis: Clayton Publishing House, 1975) 21; H. W. Hertzberg, I & 11
Samuel (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964) 71.
19. An exceptionally brilliant account how God's will
was achieved in a human situation as convoluted as a Russian novel is presented
by G. von Rad, ''The Beginnings of Historical Writing in Ancient Israel,''
The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1966) 166-204.
20 ..We note the traumatic problem of the late royal
period, experienced particularly by the prophets: were the promises about David
and Jerusalem unconditional? Could Jerusalem possibly be destroyed? While
Isaiah 1-39 holds for its inviolability, Jeremiah held that it could collapse
as did Shiloh (Jer 26; 7).
21. .In Is 11, the prophet finally admitted that God
could cut down the Davidic dynasty, so that nothing is left but a hidden root
(Jesse, David's father). Eventually God would send the Spirit so that new life
would appear as a tender shoot.
22. Cf., R. E. Murphy, ''Introduction to Wisdom
Literature,'' Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewoods Cliff, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, 1968) ch 28, n 4; H. Duesberg and I. Fransen, Les Scribes
Inspires, 2 ed (Belgium: Editions de Maredsous, 1966) 15-95. William
McKane, Proverbs (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970) 51-208 on
"International Wisdom."
23. As examples, see 2 Sam 12:11; 21:1; Ez 20:25-26;
cf., W.Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1967) Vol II, p 153-4; P. van ImSchoot, Theology of the
Old Testament (New York: Desclee, 1965) 106-7.
24. Cf., R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, Vol
I, p 7-8.
25. A similar tradition, attributing the order of elders
directly to God, is given in Deut 1:9-18.
26. Cf., Acts 11:3; 14:23; ch 15-16; 1 Tim 5:17,
19; Jam 5:14.
27. Archbishop William Borders' pastoral letter, August
19, 1977, stated very succinctly the principal thesis of our chapter: "Every
faith community in each period of history must understand the mission of Christ
and his message in relationship to its culture and age. Yet the church must
grow and therefore change. As an instrument of the Holy Spirit, the church
proclaims, protects and penetrates the truth of the Father's revelation; but
never in any formulation will the church express the totality of revealed
truth. The church must speak within a cultural pattern so that eternal truths
are expressed within the confinement of space and time. The church penetrates
and modifies an existing culture but does not substitute another for it. The
church accepts what is good in all cultures. It tries to change those things
which wound the lives of people, becoming, as Jesus challenged us to be, a
leaven for society" Origins NC Documentary Service 7 (Sept. 1, 1977)
168. We have developed these ideas at greater length in Thirsting for the
Lord (New York: Alba House, 1977), especially in ch 17 "The Process of
Humanization.''
28. We attempt to compare these two styles of
prophetical action in "Prophecy in Israel,'' Perspectives on Charismatic
Renewal, ed. by Edward D. O'Connor (University of Notre Dame Press: 1975)
13-35. The emergence of charismatic leadership within the Church today is
discussed in this book by Dennis J. Geaney (ch 11) and by Alcuin Coyle (ch 12).
29. This name, "classical prophet," was established by
W. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1961) Vol I, p. 338.
30. An important book, linking prophecy with Israel's
traditions and law, is by Richard V. Bergren, The Prophets and the Law
(Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1974).
31. James A. Sanders, "Hermeneutics in True and False
Prophecy," Canon and Authority, ed. by G.W. Coats & B.O. Long
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977) 31.
32. i.e., oracles against the nations (1:3-2:16), each
introduced by ''For three crimes . . . and for four, I will not revoke my
word"; two series of thirteen oracles each (3:1-5:9 & 5:10-10:14); the
visions (7:1-3, 4-6, 7-9; 8:1-3; 9:1-4); another series of four oracles
(8:4-14); concluding oracle of destruction and restoration (9:5-15). Each of
these subdivisions possesses internal features of well organized structure.
33.Cf., Paul D. Hanson, The Dawn of
Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975); G.W. Ahlström, Joel and
the Temple Cult of Jerusalem (Leiden1971)
34. A good exposition, when and how earlier traditions
were transmitted, redacted, and given a firm place within Israel's growing
"canon" is provided by P. Grelot, "The Formation of the Old Testament,"
Introduction to the Old Testament, ed. by A. Robert and A. Feuillet (New
York: Desclee, 1968) 556-605.
35. Cf., Elizabeth Carroll, "The Proper Place for
Women in the Church,'' Women and Catholic Priesthood, ed. by Anne Marie
Gardiner (New York: Paulist, 1976) 21-22. This question has already been
discussed in ch. 1 of this book.
36. W Eichrodt, op. cit., 206-210, places the
intuition of "God as personal" as the basic revelation of God in the old
Testament, more crucial for understanding Old Testament theology than any other
divine attribute.
37. From this fact there developed the system of types
and antitypes, as well as of promise and fulfillment.
38. The element of surprise in Israel's development is
expressed in the Hebrew word pith’om, to be translated "suddenly''
or "by surprise." It occurs in Is 48:3 & Mal 3:1.
39. For this insistence upon first creation (i.e.,
founding of city and temple) and upon the New Year's festival, see my work,
Creative Redemption in Deutero-lsaiah (Rome: Pontifical Institute Press,
1970) 74-82. The difference with Israel's religion is presented by R.A.F.
MacKenzie, Faith and History in the Old Testament (Minneapolis: 1963).
40. The importance of the exodus or journey motif in the
New Testament can be seen in the travel-motif of the gospels, especially of
Luke; it constitutes one of the dominant themes in the Epistle to the Hebrews,
this time in terms of God's people on a procession towards the Holy of Holies
with Jesus at the head already behind the veil (Heb 9:11).
41. Here we depend principally upon the doctoral
dissertation, defended before the Pontifical Biblical Commission by Aelred
Cody, A History of Old Testament Priesthood (Rome: Pontifical Biblical
Institute Press, 1969); R. de Vaux, Histoire Ancienne D'lsrael (Paris:
Gabalda, 1971); id., Ancient Israel (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961), in
paperback edition, Vol 2, "Religious Institutions"; also James C. Kelly, The
Function of Priest in the Old Testament (Pontificium Athenaeum Antonianium,
1973). The first two works include extensive bibliography.
42. Cf., Marshall D. Johnson, The Purpose of
the Biblical Genealogies with Special Reference to the Setting of the
Genealogies of Jesus (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1969).
43. i e., I Chron 1-9.
44. Cf., R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, Vol
I, p 6, "Individuals, too, can be incorporated into a tribe either by adoption
into a family . . . or through acceptance by the sheikh or the elders. Even
here the principle is safeguarded, for the newcomer is attached 'in name and in
blood' to the tribe; this means that he acknowledges the tribe's ancestor as
his own, that he will marry within the tribe and raise up his family inside it.
The Arabs say that he is 'genealogized' (root: nasaba). With a whole
clan the fusion takes longer, but the result is the same, and the newcomers are
finally considered as being of the same blood.''
45. G. von Rad, Genesis, 2 ed. (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1972) 145.
46. A. Clamer, La Genèse (Paris: Letouzey
et Ané, 1953) 224.
47. Even a cursory reading of Gen 49:5-7 and Deut
33:8-11 will manifest two pronouncedly different attitudes towards Levi. Gen 49
reflects not only the earlier curse and displacement suffered by Levi but also
the later jealousy towards its priestly privileges in the southern kingdom of
Judah.
48. Cf., R. de Vaux. Ancient Israel, Vol
II, p 370-1.
49. Although royalty performed liturgical acts, they
were seldom called "priests," probably because the hebrew word for priest,
kohen, means "to serve."
50. The Jebusite origin of Zadok is defended by A. Cody,
op. cit., 88-93.
51. Sebastian MacDonald in ch 9 of this book will
explain the role of "conflict" in theological development.
52. Cf., Deut 12:12; 14:27, 29; 18:1-2; Num
18:20; Josh 13:33; Ps 16.
53. Cf., David M. Stanley, ''Conception of
Salvation in Primitive Christian Preaching,'' CBQ 18 (July, 1956)
231-254; J. Schmitt, ''L'Eglise de Jérusalem ou la Restauration
d'Israël d'après Act 1-5," Recherches de Science Religieuse
27 (1953) 209-18.
54. These ideas of symbol are drawn from my
introduction, written for Joan Schaupp, Woman, Image of the Holy Spirit
(Denville, N.J.: Dimension Books, 1975). Cf., Thomas Fawrett, The
Symbolic Language of Religion (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1971); L. L.
Mitchell, The Meaning of Ritual (New York: Paulist, 1977); Cyprian
Vagaggini, Theological dimensions of the Liturgy (Collegeville:
Liturgical Press, 1977). Symbolism is discussed from a liturgical viewpoint by
Ralph Keifer (ch. 7) and from the psychodynamic aspect by Thomas More Newbold
(ch. 10), in this book.
55. Cf., Declaration, sec. 5, par. 25-33.
56. An important Hebrew word for temple, miskan,
etymologically means "desert tent." After the settlement in the Holy Land
it was reserved for the liturgical tent or temple. Only in the very late
postexilic age did it revert back to signify secular homes. In any case, the
original natural form was not preserved (desert tent) but its original
significance (God's providing for his people) was maintained. Cf., Frank
M. Cross, Jr., "The Priestly Tabernacle," Biblical Archaeologist 10
(1947) 45-68, reprinted in The Biblical Archaeologist Reader 1 (Garden
City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1961) 201-228.
57. This statement about heaven's breaking the bounds of
earthly sexuality can be directed towards the importance of a celibate presence
within the priesthood on earth. Earthly symbolism must point to the heavenly.
This symbolism too must be maintained but not at too high a cost for preserving
"natural resemblance," because "virginity" undergoes its own transcendent
history in the Bible. For instance in Rev 14:4, all the elect must be
adults, male and virgins, if natural resemblance is insisted upon. The text
reads: hoi meta gunaikon ouk emolunthesan, parthenoi gar eisin; a very
literal translation is: "these are the men who have never been defiled with
women, for they are virgins.'' Because "virgins" and "defilement" must be taken
figuratively, so as to stir serious thought and application among all
the faithful, the symbolic expression in the church must avoid excessive
literalism or extreme forms of "natural resemblance."
58. Cf., Phil 4:8, ". . . your thoughts should be
wholly directed to all that is true, all that deserves respect, all that is
honest, pure, admirable, decent, virtuous, or worthy of praise."
Contents of the
book
Support our
campaign
Sitemap
Contemporary
theologians
Join Campaign
activities
Go back to home
page
Join our Women Priests' Mailing List
for occasional newsletters:
An email will be immediately sent to you
requesting your confirmation.
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!