“It would seem that the female sex is no impediment to receiving
Orders . . . . . On the contrary, It is said (1 Tim. 2:12): "I suffer not a
woman to teach in the Church, nor to use authority over the man." . . .
Summa Theologica Suppl. qu. 39 art. 1.
Note: The words ‘in the Church’ are from 1 Cor.
14:34, "Let women keep silence in the churches."
“Certain things are required in the recipient of a sacrament as
being requisite for the validity of the sacrament, and if such things be
lacking, one can receive neither the sacrament nor the reality of the
sacrament. Other things, however, are required, not for the validity of the
sacrament, but for its lawfulness, as being congruous to the sacrament; and
without these one receives the sacrament, but not the reality of the sacrament.
Accordingly we must say that the male sex is required for receiving Orders not
only in the second, but also in the first way. Wherefore even though a woman
were made the object of all that is done in conferring Orders, she would not
receive Orders, for since a sacrament is a sign, not only the thing, but the
signification of the thing, is required in all sacramental actions; thus it was
stated above (32, 2) that in Extreme Unction it is necessary to have a sick
man, in order to signify the need of healing. Accordingly, since it is not
possible in the female sex to signify eminence of degree, for a woman is in the
state of subjection, it follows that she cannot receive the sacrament of
Order . . . Summa Theologica Suppl. qu. 39 art. 1.
Some, however, have asserted that the male sex is necessary for the
lawfulness and not for the validity of the sacrament, because even in the
Decretals (cap. Mulieres dist. 32; cap. Diaconissam, 27, qu. i) mention is made
of deaconesses and priestesses. But deaconess there denotes a woman who shares
in some act of a deacon, namely who reads the homilies in the Church; and
priestess [presbytera] means a widow, for the word "presbyter" means elder.
Summa Theologica Suppl. qu. 39 art. 1.
