Dear Father Bloom:
Good to hear from you again. These are some definitions as you requested:
1. Sexism -- any form of discrimination based on gender. Morally it is a sin, and it is even worst than racism because it hurts people even deeper. It is rooted in original sin (Genesis 3:16). Canon 1024 is intrinsically sexist.
2. Fundamentalism -- a form of interpreting the deposit of faith (scriptures and tradition) which attempts to alleviate feelings of ambiguity and ambivalence by recourse to simplistic, zealous, and rigid interpretations. See the excellent article by Matt Davis in http://incolor.inetnebr.com/mdavis/fundmntl.htm.
3. Magisterium -- the teaching office of the church. All church teachings deserve respect, but only those teachings infallibly defined as revealed truth require absolute assent. The last one was the dogma of the assumption (1950). That only males can be living sacraments of the Word made flesh is not a dogma of the Catholic faith. CCC 1577 and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis are fundamentalist rationalizations of canon 1024.
The best way to conduct these dialogues is in terms of questions and answers. You ask some questions, I answer them. Then I ask some questions, you answer them.
Questions for your consideration:
1. Isn't Ordinatio Sacerdotalis a fundamentalist rationalization of canon 1024?
2. Isn't this canon an artificial contraceptive of female priestly vocations?
3. Isn't it time to cancel this canon in order to enable the Lord to call women if He so desires?
The peace of Christ,
Luis
*********************************************************
Dear Luis,
Thanks for your e-mail and for explaining what those three words mean to you. Since words not only convey a concept, but an emotional charge it is important to know it when we are trying to communicate. This is especially true with a topic is as delicate as the one we are discussing. Before offering a couple questions of my own, I will do the best I can to answer the ones you pose.
1. Isn't Ordinatio Sacerdotalis a fundamentalist rationalization of canon 1024?
Given your definition of fundamentalism, that may be true. (I cannot see into the pope’s heart to know what feelings of ambivalence he may have had when writing Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, so I cannot say.) However, I do believe we have to determine the "literary form" of each of the statements in order to accurately interpret them. A canon is a bald statement of a ground rule. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is a more elaborate clarification of that canon. We Americans may have a tendency to view these statements like planks of a political platform. A person might consider himself a democrat if he agrees with, say, 80% of the platform. It is not the same with the magisterium of the Church. To pick and chose is to deny the unity of the deposit of faith Jesus has given us.
2. Isn't this canon an artificial contraceptive of female priestly vocations?
To me contraception would not apply here, even analogously. It would be like saying two homosexuals are practicing contraception when using a condom. You cannot contracept when no conception is possible. That is the bottom line of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. The Church does not have the authority to ordain a woman any more than a priest has the power to consecrate a corn muffin. I prefer corn tortillas to wheat, but the former wouldn’t work for Mass, while the latter could.
3. Isn't it time to cancel this canon in order to enable the Lord to call women if He so desires?
I believe the Lord has wonderful plans for women, including the ones who have discerned they are being called to the priesthood. But they need to take the objective teaching of the Church into their discernment process. "He who hears you, hears me," said Jesus. By your definition this might be sexist and a serious sin, but I do not think so. In my article I pointed out several cases where a certain "discrimination" on the basis of gender is positive. Can it be a sin (sexism) to audition only women for the role of Scarlett O’Hare?
That is my first question in return. A second: What did Jesus mean when he said "he who hears you hears me?"
Anyway, Luis, I’ll give you some time on these because I am going down to Peru next Monday (Oct 21) and won’t be back till Nov 14. I ask your prayers for a wonderful project there which works with health professionals and married couples to teach Natural Family Planning.
In Christ,
Fr. Phil Bloom
P.S. Since we will have a few weeks before completing the next exchange I will throw in a bonus question. What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis--and what would be a correct exegesis of Gen 2:22? I ask this because the Church Fathers and many modern scripture scholars see that verse as intimately related to John 19:34.
Your comments or questions are welcome.
Back to Why there can Never be Women Priests
Return to Home Page