 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
Rome says: ‘Since the Middle Ages and up to our own time, it
can be said that the question [of the ordination of women] has not been raised
again, for the practice has enjoyed peaceful and universal acceptance.’
Inter Insigniores § 7.
What may look like a ‘peaceful and universal acceptance’ has
actually been massive suppression through an aggravated social and religious
anti-feminine climate.
Issue ignored by the major theologians
For many of the major theologians in this period, the issue of the
ordination of women seems so ‘obviously a closed chapter’ that it is
hardly discussed at length. When the question is mentioned, the arguments
against women’s ordination turn out to be the classic combination of
misunderstood Scripture texts and crass theological prejudice.
A typical example of this is Cardinal
Robert Bellarmine (1542 - 1621 AD). For him women cannot be ordained
because they are inferior by nature and subject to men. That is why Paul
forbade them to teach.
Hatred, and even persecution, of
women
A good idea of the misogynist theology of post-medieval times may be had
from ‘The First Blast of the Trumpet’ by John Knox (1514 - 1572 AD).
He was the best known protestant theologian during the time of the Reformation
after Luther and Calvin. The main contention of ‘The First Blast of the Trumpet’
is that the exercise of authority by women is contrary to both natural law and
religion. The interest of this lengthy treatise for us is that Knox's arguments
reflect the beliefs of the day, both among Catholics and Reformers. Here is
just one excerpt:
“ . . . God has pronounced sentence in these words: "Thy will
shall be subject to thy husband, and he shall bear dominion over thee" (Gen.
3:16). As [though] God should say, "Forasmuch as you have abused your former
condition, and because your free will has brought yourself and mankind into the
bondage of Satan, I therefore will bring you in bondage to man. For where
before your obedience should have been voluntary, now it shall be by constraint
and by necessity; and that because you have deceived your man, you shall
therefore be no longer mistress over your own appetites, over your own will or
desires. For in you there is neither reason nor discretion which are able to
moderate your affections, and therefore they shall be subject to the desire of
your man. He shall be lord and governor, not only over your body, but even over
your appetites and will." This sentence, I say, did God pronounce against Eve
and her daughters, as the rest of the scriptures do evidently witness. So that
no woman can ever presume to reign above man.”
The hatred against women did not remain with words. The
actual persecutions that followed are beyond belief. To demonstrate this,
consider a ‘Catholic’ book, the
Hammer of Witches, written by two theologians, Jakob Sprenger OP and
Heinrich Kramer OP. The book was endorsed and recommended by Pope Innocent VIII
in 1484 AD, and was used for centuries. It caused thousands of innocent women
to be burnt at the stake. It is these publicly honoured, uncontradicted, widely
quoted “theologians” who wrote:
“What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an
unescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable
calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted
with fair colours.”
“It should be noted that there was a defect
in the formation of the first woman, since she was formed from a bent rib, that
is, a rib of the breast, which is bent as it were in a contrary direction to
man. And since through this defect she is an imperfect animal, she always
deceives”.
“(When Eve answered the serpent) she showed that she
doubted and had little faith in the word of God. All this is indicated by the
etymology of the word; for Femina (Latin for "woman") comes from
Fe (=faith) and Minus (=less) since she is ever weaker to hold
and preserve the faith”.
The Malleus Maleficarum , p. 43. It continues for
page after page of vitriolic hatred of
women.
The classical theological handbooks and a large part of the
ordinary “traditional” interpretation of Scripture against women was
an inheritance of this kind of theology.
Cornelius a Lapide, for instance,
comments on the prohibition against women speaking in church by giving six
reasons:
- it follows from woman’s nature and God’s positive command
in Gen 3, 16;
- silence is more suitable to woman’s humble status in the
presence of men;
- man possesses better reason and judgement and more discretion than
woman;
- by speaking woman may be tempted to lure man to sin;
- it is better that women remain ignorant of what is not
necessary;
- by asking stupid questions in Church (1 Cor 14, 35) she would give
scandal to others.
Institutional oppression of women by Church Law
Under the Corpus Iuris Canonici. 1234 - 1916 (!) AD.
The legal situation of women under the Corpus Iuris Canonici
(1234 - 1916 AD) was a systematic denial of rights, as in this summary by
L'Abbé André, Droit Canon, Paris 1859, vol. 2, col.
75.
- “By a principle of civil law, no woman can exercise a public
office. By Church Law women are equally barred from all spiritual functions and
offices.”
- “A woman can, therefore, not receive any ecclesiastical
ordination. If she receives one, the ordination will not imprint a sacramental
character . . . .”
- “No woman, however saintly she may be, may either preach or
teach . . . .”
- “A wife is under the power of her husband, the husband not under
the power of the wife. The husband may punish her. A wife is obliged to follow
her husband to wherever he decides to fix his residence.”
- “A woman is bound to greater modesty than a man.”
- “A woman is sooner excused on account of fear than a man. She is
dispensed from going to Rome to obtain absolution from an
excommunication.”
The ritual prohibitions against women under the Corpus Iuris
Canonici (1234 - 1916 AD) can be seen in the following examples:
- Women cannot be
ordained
- A woman may not normally
baptize
- A woman may not touch the
corporal
- Women may not receive
communion during their monthly periods
- Women should receive
communion in their hand on a ‘housel-towel’ or on the tongue
- Women should be veiled when
receiving communion
- Women may not be singers in
Church
The ridiculous prohibition for women to ‘sing in
church’ was reiterated more than once by the Sacred Congregation for
Liturgy. Girls or women could not be members of any church choir (decree 17
Sept. 1897). “Women should not be part of a choir; they belong to the
ranks of the laity. Separate women's choirs too are totally forbidden, except
for serious reasons and with permission of the bishop” (decree 22 Nov.
1907). “Any mixed choir of men and women, even if they stand far from the
sanctuary, is totally forbidden” (decree 18 Dec. 1908).
The Codex Iuris Canonici. 1917 - 1983 (!).
The Codex Iuris Canonici, promulgated
in 1917, contained the following canons based on a woman's presumed
inferiority:
- “A wife who is not legitimately separated from her husband,
automatically retains her husband's domicile”, Canon 93, § 1.
- “Only [male] clerics can hold the power of order or
ecclesiastical jurisdiction, or obtain benefices and ecclesiastical
pensions”, Canon 118.
- “[With regard to confraternities or pious unions established to
promote devotional or charitable works], women cannot be given membership in
them, except for the purpose of gaining the indulgences and spiritual graces
granted to the male members”, Canon 709, § 2.
- “Only a baptized male can receive sacred ordination”,
Canon 968, § 1.
- “[In the canonization process] anyone of the faithful can
request that a case be instigated . . . . Men can act through themselves or
through a properly appointed procurator; women only through a procurator”,
Canon 2004, § 1
The same Codex Iuris Canonicicontained
the following canons based on a woman's presumed ritual uncleanness:
- Women are the last choice of minister
for baptism
- Women may not distribute holy
communion
- Girls or women may not be Mass servers
at the altar
- Only men can be ordained to Holy
Orders
- Women should have their heads veiled in
church
- Sacred linen must first be washed by
men, before women touch them
- Women may not preach in church
- Women may not read out Sacred Scripture
in church
Betrayal by
theologians
During the last few centuries there have been few original theologians.
Most just repeated the treatises of the past, quibbling with colleagues about
details.
As to scriptural passages, a critical understanding of literary forms
was lacking and commentaries were filled with standard social prejudice.
Cornelius A Lapide, who wrote in the 17th
century, but who remained very popular well into the 19th may serve as an
example.
As to the ordination of women to the priesthood in dogmatic treatises,
see the example of Francesco P. Solá,
who devotes just two pages to the topic and whose arguments, both from
Scripture and Tradition, are utterly pathetic.
Conclusion
Rome’s statement that the tradition of
not-ordaining women to the priesthood ‘enjoyed peaceful and universal
acceptance’ sounds cynical against this background.
During the
post-medieval period women lay in a graveyard, as far as Church leaders and
theologians were concerned.
John Wijngaards
Follow @JohnWijngaards
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!