 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
13th century
An analysis of why, he claims, women cannot be ordained
priests
Richard’s passage that concenrns the ordination of women can be
found in Ricardus de Media Villa [= Richard of Middleton] Super Quarto Sententiarum [= commentary on
Peter Lombard’s Sententiarum vol. 4] Dist. 25, a. 4, n. 1; ed. Bocatelli,
Venice, 1499 (Pellechet-Polain, 10132/9920), f 177-R. Read here
the original Latin text or its
translation into English. Paragraph numbers refer to
this text.
Arguments against the ordination of women
1. Women were forbidden to touch sacred objects (§5). Therefore all
the more they should not be ordained priests.
Answer. The argument is obviously invalid. It shows the
unfortunate influence of early local synods on medieval Church Law.
2. Women cannot receive the tonsure which is required for minor orders
because it would not be becoming (§6). Therefore they cannot be
ordained.
Answer. The argument is simply ridiculous.
3. Christ has instituted Holy Orders to be conferred only to men, not to
women (§7).
Answer. Middleton does not prove that Christ has imposed
this restriction. He simply assumes it. And here the scholastic principle
applies: ‘Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur’ = What is
asserted without reason, may be denied without reason.
4. [His own first main reason] Priests have to teach. But women
cannot teach because of their weak intellect and emotional instability
(§9).
5. [His own second main reason] Ordination requires eminence of
nature which women lack. Because women are subject to men (§10).
Answer. This kind of
prejudice underlies all medieval thinking and makes it impossible to
imagine that women too could be priests. They are the real reason why women
were banned from ordination. Other theological reasons given are
rationalizations to justify the
prejudices.
6. St. Paul confirmed this by saying that women should not teach in
public (§11).
Answer. 1 Timothy 2,11-15
is understood out of context. It may not be interpreted as implying a general
rule, prohibiting women from teaching for all time to come. The Church
acknowledges this interpretation. Modern
Church Law allows women to teach in church.
Middleton’s replies to the arguments in favour of women’s
ordination.
a. Paul’s text that there are no longer male or female in Christ
(Galatians 3,27-28), applies only to
merit, not to holding ordained office in the Church (see §2 and 12).
Answer. Paul does not speak about merit in Galatians 3,27-28,
but about a real equality of status in Christ. Women therefore have the
same eminence as men, and can be ordained.
b. There never were ordained women in the past. ‘Presbytera’
refers to a senioir widow, ‘diaconissa’ to ‘abbess’, or
someone blessed to read the homily at matins (see §3 and 13).
Answer. Middleton shows his ignorance of history. Today we know
better. Women deacons were sacramentally
ordained, as the ordination rituals of early centuries show. In some parts of
Europe women were also ordained as
priests.
c. Women were prophetesses, but a prophetess has no authority over men.
But ordination would give women such authority and that is incompatible with
their status of subjection (see §4 and §14).
Answer. Prejudice surfaces again! Like his contemporaries
Middleton considers women inferior to
men.
Conclusion
Richard Middleton's arguments for excluding women from the priesthood
are invalid.
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!