John Duns Scotus, a Franciscan friar, was one of the most influential
philosophers and theologians in the Middle Ages. He lectured at Cambridge,
Oxford and Paris. In the post-scholastic age (16th - 18th centuries) his
followers among Catholic theologians outnumbered those following St. Thomas
Aquinas.
Why women cannot be ordained priests
A brief analysis of his arguments
Our analysis will be based on a text from Scotus’s commentary on
the Sentences of Peter Lombard, printed in the Duns Scoti Opera Omnia,
ed. Vives, Paris 1894, vol. 24, ‘Reportata Parisiensia’, Liber 4,
Distinctio 25, Quaestio 2, pp. 367-371. Read the
original Latin text or its translation into
English. Paragraph numbers in this analysis refer to the translation.
Reasons why women cannnot be ordained:
Christ himself has excluded women from Holy Orders. Main
reason (see § 18, 20, 22, 24) Scotus does not provide a direct
scriptural basis for it. He argues that neither the Apostles nor the later
Church could have excluded women on their own authority. Therefore, it MUST
have been Christ’s decision. (§18) That makes him say that women are
excluded by divine law (§11). Since man and woman share the same human
nature, the exclusion from Holy Orders must be based on a divine ruling
(§24). Response. This is a very weak argument. (a) There is no
scriptural basis. (b) We know that Jesus Christ left many such decisions to the later Church.
By implication, if it was the later Church that kept women from ordination, the
Church can change this ruling.
Priests have to teach, but Paul forbids women to teach
(§19). Response. 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.
Modern Church Law allows women to teach
in church.
Women are inferior to men (§19, 22) Scotus enumerates the
prejudices of his time: women have a weak intelligence and are emotionally
unstable (§19). God has subjected women to men (§22). Wielding
authority over men is contrary to women’s nature
(§22). Response. This threefold prejudice underlies all medieval
thinking and makes it impossible to imagine that women too could be priests.
The theological reasons given are rationalizations to justify the
prejudices.
Church law forbids women to touch sacred vessels (§5) and
women could not honourably receive the tonsure
(§6). Response. The arguments are obviously invalid. They show
the unfortunate influence of early local synods
on medieval Church Law.
Scotus’s replies to objections:
What about Galatians
3,27-28 (the equality between man and woman in Christ)? Scotus says the
equality regards salvation. It does not extend to possessing an eminent
position in the Church. (§1, 25) The argument is invalid, because Holy
Orders are about salvation, and excluding women does affect the salvation of
people.
What about ‘presbyterae’ (women priests) and
‘diaconissae’ (women deacons) in tradition? Scotus dismisses
these terms as not referring to women who were ordained to Holy Orders. (see
§2, 26). However, 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.
What about Mary Magdalene who was a preacher and an Apostle?
Scotus replies that she was an exception (§21). But if there was an
exception, it is not the female sex as such that excludes from ordination!
Do men and women not have the same nature? Scotus struggles to
answer here. All he can do is to say that the exclusion from Holy Orders is
God’s own will (§24).
