 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
From INTER INSIGNIORES:
(The hyper-linked comments in italics are by John
Wijngaards)
15. When they and Paul went beyond the confines of the
Jewish world, the preaching of the Gospel and the Christian life in the
Greco-Roman civilization impelled them to break with Mosaic practices,
sometimes regretfully. They could therefore have envisaged conferring
ordination on women [Do Paul's letters not
show that social and cultural prejudides remained a reality in the Christian
communities?], if they had not been convinced of their duty of fidelity
to the Lord on this point [Was it nor rather
that the Apostles, like Christ, could not immediately break with social
custom?]. In the Hellenistic world, the cult of a number of pagan
divinities was entrusted to priestesses. In fact the Greeks did not share the
ideas of the Jews: although their philosophers taught the inferiority of women
[Was this not an ‘inferiority by
nature’?] , historians nevertheless emphazise the existence of a
certain movement for the advancement of women during the Imperial period [Did the Roman laws that excluded women from all
authority not remain in force?]. In fact we know from the book of Acts
and from the Letters of St Paul that certain women worked with the Apostle for
the Gospel (cf. Rom. 16:3-12; Phil. 4:3). Saint Paul lists their names with
gratitude in the final salutations of the Letters. Some of them often exercised
an important influence on conversions: Priscilla, Lydia and others; especially
Priscilla, who took it on herself to complete the instruction of Apollos (cf.
Acts 18:26), Phoebe, in the service of the Church of Cenchreae (cf. Rom. 161).
All these facts manifest within the Apostolic Church a considerable evolution
vis-a-vis the customs of Judaism. Nevertheless at no time was there a question
of conferring ordination on these women [But did this
involvement of women in the ministry not lead to their being sacramentally
ordained as deacons?].
16. In the Pauline Letters, exegetes of authority have
noted a difference between two formulas used by the Apostle: he writes
indiscriminately ‘My fellow workers’ (Rom. 16:3; Phil. 4:2-3) when
referring to men and women helping him in his apostolate in one way or another,
but he reserves the title 'God’s fellow workers’ (1 Cor. 3:9; cf. 1
Thess. 3:2) to Apollos Timothy and, himself, thus designated because they are
directly set apart for the apostolic ministry and the preaching of the Word of
God. [Does this distinction really hold up
scrutiny?] In spite of the so important role played by women on the day
of the Resurrection, their collaboration was not extended by Saint Paul to the
official and public proclamation of the message, since this proclamation
belongs exclusively to the apostolic mission. [But
what about the tradition that women did proclaim the message with the
Apostles?]
For the full text, see: INTER INSIGNIORES.
From the
Commentary by the Sacred
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the Declaration Inter
Insigniores:
38. In some writers of the Middle Ages however there was a
certain hesitancy, reported by St Bonaventure without adopting it himself (37)
and noted also by Joannes Teutonicus in his gloss on Caus. 27, q. 1, c.
23,(38) This hesitancy stemmed from the knowledge that in the past there
had been deaconesses: had they received true sacramental ordination? [Did this hesitancy not also stem from the
realisation that only baptism is required for the valid reception of Holy
Orders?] This problem (of deaconesses) has been brought up again very
recently..
Note 37. St Bonaventure, In IV Sent., Dist. 25, art.
2, q. 1, ed. Quaracchi, t. 4, p.650: Omnes consentiant quod promoveri
non debent, sed utrum possint, dubium est (the doubt arises from the case
of the deaconesses); he concludes: secundum saniorem opinionem et
prudentiorum doctorum non solum non debent vel non possunt de jure, verum etiam
non possnt de facto.
Note 38. This canon deals with deaconesses. At the word
ordinari, Johannes Teutonicus states: respondeo quod mulieres non
recipient characterem, impediente sexu et constitutione Ecclesiae: unde nec
officium ordinum exercere possunt . . . nec ord inatur haec: sed fundebatur
super eam forte aliqua benedictio, ex qua consequebatur aliquod officium
speciale, forte legendo homilias vel evangelium ad matutinas quod non licebat
aliis. Alii dicunt quod si monialis ordinetur, bene recipit characterem, quia
ordinari facti est et post baptismum quilibet potest ordinare.
39. It was by no means unknown to the seventeenth and
eighteenth century theologians, who had an excellent knowledge of the history
of literature. [Did they not simply exclude the
sacramentality of the women’s diaconate on the principle of their presumed
incapability for Holy Orders?] In any case, it is a question that must
be taken up fully by direct study of the texts, without preconceived ideas
[Do the facts not show that the deaconesses received
a valid ordination?] ; hence the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith has judged that it should be kept for the future and not touched
upon in the present document [Why would the question
not be relevant? If women did receive the sacramental diaconate, are they not
thereby proved capable of receiving Holy Orders?]
57. In spite of this, the apostles did not entrust to women
the strictly apostolic ministry, although Hellenistic civilization did not have
the same prejudices against them as did Judaism. [Were the prejudices in
Hellenistic society, both on account of Greek
thinking and Roman law, not as bad as in
Judaism?] It is rather a ministry which is of another order, as may perhaps
also be gathered from Paul’s vocabulary, in which a difference seems to be
implied between ‘my fellow workers’ (synergoi mou) and
‘God’s fellow workers (Theou synergoi).(41) [Can such a difference really be demonstrated
from the scriptural text?]
Note 41. I. De La Potterie, Titres missionnaires du
chrétien dans le Nouveau Testament (Rapports de la XXXIème
semaine de Missiologie, Louvain, 1966). Paris, Desclée de Brouwer, 1966,
p.29-46, cf. pp.44-45.
71. It has likewise been remarked that in the course of
time the Church has agreed to confer on women certain truly ministerial
functions that antiquity refused to give them in the very name of the example
and will of Christ. [But did the early Church not
admit women deacons to the sacrament of the diaconate?] The functions
spoken of are above all the administration of baptism, teaching and certain
forms of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. [Did women
deacons not baptise, teach and have pastoral responsibilities, just like their
male colleagues? and Did the exclusion from these
functions in later time not derive directly from the three-fold prejudice
against women?]
72. As regards baptism, however, not even deaconesses in
the Syriac-speaking East were permitted to administer it [Does the Didascalia not indicate that women deacons did not
only anoint but perform the actual immersion at baptism?], and its
solemn administration is still a hierarchical act reserved to bishop, priest
and, in accessory fashion, deacon. When urgently required, baptism can be
conferred not only by Christians but even by unbaptized people whether men or
women
73. Its validity therefore does not require the baptismal
character still less that of ordination. This point is affirmed by practice and
by theologians. It is an example of this necessary discernment in the
Church’s teaching and practice, a discernment whose only guarantee is the
Church herself.
74. As regards teaching, a classical distinction has to be
made, from Paul’s letter onwards. [Is the prohibition of women teaching
in Church not based on a misreading of 1
Timothy 2,11-15 and 1 Corinthians
14,34-35? and Was this misreading not perpetuated
through a faulty argument in the Church Orders?] There are forms of
teaching or edification that key people can carry out and in this case St Paul
expressly mentions women. These forms include the charisma of
‘prophecy’ (1 Cor. 11:15).
75. In this sense there was no obstacle to giving the title
of doctor to Teresa of Avila and Catherine of Siena, as it was given to
illustrious teachers such as Albert the Great or St Laurence of Brindisi. Quite
a different matter is the official and hierarchical function of teaching the
revealed message, a function that presupposes the mission received from Christ
by the apostles and transmitted by them to their successors. [Was and is the exclusion from this form of teaching not
based on the presumed inferiority of women, still enshrined in Church
law?]
76. Examples of participation by women in ecclesiastical
jurisdiction are found in the Middle Ages: some abbesses (not abbesses in
general, as is sometimes said in popularizing articles) performed acts normally
reserved to bishops, such as the nomination of parish priests or confessors.
These customs have been more or less reproved by the Holy See at different
periods: the letter of Pope Innocent III quoted earlier was intended as a
reprimand to the Abbess of Las Heulgas.
77. But we must not forget that feudal lords arrogated to
themselves similar rights. Canonists also admitted the possibility of
separating jurisdiction from order. The Second Vatican Council has tried to
determine better the relationship between the two; the Council’s doctrinal
vision will doubtless have effects on discipline.
For the full text, see: Official Commentary on INTER INSIGNIORES.
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!