Pints With Aquinas - 22: Why can't women be priests?

Starting point is 00:00:00 Hey, thanks for joining us here at Pints with Aquinas. Before we get underway, I wanted to let you know that I am just very thankful for all of you who rated last week. You'll remember last week I said I was doing a competition. And if you rated the podcast last week, I would select 10 people at random to receive the electronic copy of my book, 20 Answers Atheism. Well, I have done that. And if you want to know whether or not you won, here's what you need to do. Go to pintswithaquinas.com, and for the next two weeks, I'll have the winners up as soon as you load that page. Email me, it'll tell you what to do,

Starting point is 00:00:46 but email me at matt at pintswithaquinas.com, and then I'll send you the book. I can't read out all the 10 people that I selected. That would be a little much. But we have over 300 ratings right now and well over 300 ratings. So thank you very much. Appreciate your support. Why don't I read just two of these winners that I chose at random, okay? Now, they're all very lovely. All of them were five stars, which is very kind of you. Here's one from Andrew. He says, As a big Aquinas geek, I was so happy to come across this podcast.

Starting point is 00:01:15 Matt Fradd makes the genius of Aquinas accessible to the average listener with each podcast entertaining as it is thought-provoking. The intellectual tradition rooted in faith, interpreted and explained by Fradd, helped inspire me to begin a master's in theology in full. Cheers to the angelic doctor. How cool is that? Andrew, that's awesome. Thank you so much. Let's see another one of these ones that I chose. It's been awesome to get reviews from people who

Starting point is 00:01:42 aren't even Catholic, by the way. Thank you so much for that. All right, how about we'll just read one more. This is from Philosoraptor602. He said this, I don't normally rate podcasts, but I decided to do so in this case just because I enjoy this podcast so much. As a Catholic student of philosophy with a great appreciation for Thomas Aquinas, I love how this podcast finds a balance between giving Thomas' intellectual genius its proper due and making that same genius accessible down to earth by tackling questions still relevant today. I highly recommend this podcast to anyone. How cool is that? Thanks so much, guys.

Starting point is 00:02:25 As I say, I could read more, but I think that might take a little too much time, so I'm not going to. But go to pintswithaquinas.com to see if you won, and I will send you the book. All right, on to the show. It's an exciting one. Bye. Bye. Bye. Welcome to Pints with Aquinas, episode 22.

Starting point is 00:02:51 I'm Matt Fradd. If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be? In today's episode, we'll ask St. Thomas the question, why can't women be priests? Welcome back to Pints with Aquinas. How are you doing? You doing well? Good. This is the show where you and I pull up a barstool next to the angelic doctor to discuss theology and philosophy. And today, we're discussing a rather controversial topic, and that is the ordination of women. We'll see what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about this. This is in the supplemental section of the Summa Theologica, question 39. And then we'll speak a little bit about what the church has said authoritatively,

Starting point is 00:03:52 and we might get into some of the objections that you and I might hear about this. So, are you ready? Here's what the man says. Here's what the man says. Certain things are required in the recipient of a sacrament as being requisite for the validity of the sacrament. Now, maybe let's just pause a moment and explain what Thomas just said. Some big words there. Recipient, requisite, validity. Certain things are required in the recipient of a sacrament as being requisite for the validity of the sacrament. So, when we talk about the validity of a sacrament, we mean that if a sacrament isn't valid, then it didn't take

Starting point is 00:04:36 effect, yeah? And so, there are certain things that are required in the one who is going to receive the sacrament if that sacrament is to be valid. So, for example, if a man and a woman are to be married, then they must be a man and a woman. That is required if the sacrament is to take effect. If two men try to marry each other, that won't take effect because what is required in order for the sacrament to be valid is at least having a man and a woman who both voluntarily wish to be married and understand what that means. All right, let's continue. Aquinas says, one receives the sacrament, but not the reality of the sacrament. Accordingly, we must say that the male sex is required for receiving orders not only in the second, but also in the first way. Wherefore, even though a woman were made the object of all that is done in conferring holy orders, she would not receive them. For since a sacrament is a sign, not only the thing,

Starting point is 00:06:03 but the signification of the thing is required in all sacramental actions. Now, here, Aquinas gives us an example. He says, with anointing of the sick, okay, with extreme unction, it is necessary to have a sick man or woman in order to signify the need of healing. All right. So if I instead, or if a priest instead tried to, you know, give the anointing of the sick to a healthy badger or a sick badger for that matter, well, you can try to do that, but not only is it illicit, but it is also invalid. All right. So Aquinas goes on, accordingly, since it's not possible in the female sex to signify eminence of degree for a woman is in the state of subjection, it follows that she cannot receive the sacrament of orders. Some, however, have asserted that the

Starting point is 00:06:59 male sex is necessary for the lawfulness and not for the validity of the sacrament. Now, just let's pause here a moment and see what Aquinas means here. He's saying there are some people who say, okay, fine. The male sex is necessary for the lawfulness, but not for the validity. And what does that mean? Well, a sacrament might be unlawful and still valid. Another word for unlawful, we say illicit, right? So, a sacrament could be illicit and still valid, all right? But a sacrament cannot be invalid and lawful. Let me give you an example. If you are to baptize a child who is not in danger of death without kind of consulting the parents, all right, or the local priest, I suppose, this would be a valid sacrament, but it would be unlawful. It would be illicit, right? You shouldn't do that. Now, if a child is dying who is not baptized,

Starting point is 00:08:08 you may both lawfully baptize the child, and that baptism would be valid. If the child is not in danger of death, and you know that and baptize the child without the consent of the parents, the baptism is unlawful. You shouldn't have done that. Nevertheless, the baptism would be valid. And so, Aquinas is saying there's some people out there who say that the priesthood is sort of like this, okay? You shouldn't ordain women, but if you do, it's unlawful, but it's still valid.

Starting point is 00:08:49 valid. What does Aquinas have to say? Well, he says that the reason people say this is because some have made mention of deaconesses and priestesses. But Aquinas says, deaconess there denotes a woman who shares in some act of a deacon, namely who reads the homilies in the church. Not a woman who was ordained. And when it comes to priestess, well, this word just means a widow, right? That is what is meant for the word presbyter, for example, means elder. So that's what Aquinas has to say. means elder. So that's what Aquinas has to say. My name is Gomer, and I'm the co-host of Catching Foxes. I would like to tell you about something more important than my podcast. Pints with Aquinas. Pints with Aquinas. Matt Fradd actually wrote a book on 50 plus deep thoughts from the angelic doctor. Pints with Aquinas. Here's the deal. Beer is easily lovable, but medieval monastic philosophers,

Starting point is 00:09:53 they can be quite intimidating. Yet in this short pithy book, and I don't use that word often. In fact, I never use the word pithy, but I'm going to use it here and you're going to agree with me. Matt Fradd made the greatest mind in the history of the church as easily accessible as your favorite beer. You'll laugh. You'll cry. Well, you won't cry. But you'll laugh, and you'll discover that this old school philosopher's wisdom is just as relevant today as it was back then. So do yourself a favor.

Starting point is 00:10:18 Get a copy of this enlightening, pithy little book from Amazon right now. And when it arrives, pour yourself a frothy pint and dig in. You'll be glad you did. Let's look at some of the objections that he sets himself and see what you think of them, and then we'll continue. He sets himself three objections. The first is, it would seem that the female sex, in the female sex, there is no impediment to receiving orders. For the office of prophet is greater than the office of priest, since a prophet stands midway between God and priests,

Starting point is 00:10:56 just as the priest does between God and people. Now, the office of prophet was sometimes granted to women, as may be gathered from 2 Kings 22, verse 14, therefore the office of priest also may be competent to them. The second objection is further, just as order pertains to a kind of preeminence, so does a position of authority as well as martyrdom and the religious state. does a position of authority as well as martyrdom and the religious state. Now, authority is entrusted to women in the New Testament, as in the case of Abbas's and in the Old Testament. Abbas's, yeah, I got that right the first time, sorry. And in the Old Testament, as in the case

Starting point is 00:11:40 of Deborah, who judged Israel. Moreover, martyrdom and the religious life are also befitting to them. Therefore, the orders of the church are also competent to them. Here's Aquinas' last objection. It's three sentences. Very quick. Further, the power of orders is founded in the soul, but sex is not in the soul. Therefore, difference in sex makes no difference to the reception of orders. How does Aquinas respond to this? Prophecy is not a sacrament, but a gift of God. Wherefore, there it is not the signification, but only the thing which is necessary. And since in matters pertaining to the soul, woman does not differ from man as to the thing, for sometimes a woman is found to be better than many men as regard the soul,

Starting point is 00:12:31 it follows that she can receive the gift of prophecy and the like, but not the sacrament of orders. And thereby appears the reply to the second and third objections. to the second and third objections. However, as to abbesses, it is said that they have not ordinary authority, but delegated as it were on account of the danger of men and women living together. But Deborah exercised authority in temporal, not in priestly matters, even as now woman may have temporal power. So, that's what he has to say. Now, let's take a look at a couple of objections to this. And I'd like to point you at the end of this podcast, I want to tell you about a terrific talk you can listen to that'll really help flesh this out. Let's have a look at some objections. First of all, you might hear some people talk about women's rights. This is a matter of women's rights that women should be made priests.

Starting point is 00:13:36 I'd like to quote Mark Shea, who's a Catholic apologist and author. He says a couple of things that I think are really insightful. He says that trying to apply rights talk here is like threatening to sue heaven for the free gift of salvation. His point being that holy orders is a sacrament, yes, but it is a gift, right? Not a right. If God gave us humans what we deserved according to strict justice, we would all be damned. So Christ came not to give us what we deserve, but to save us from it. What about those who say that, well, the reason Jesus didn't ordain women was because of social norms. He was a man of his time, this sort of thing.

Starting point is 00:14:20 Well, the first thing to say is that Greco-Roman culture had lots of women priests, so this wasn't something out of the ordinary. But more importantly, Jesus did and said lots of things that completely shocked other people, the people around him. other people, the people around him. And again, I'm quoting here from Mark Shea. He said, he horrified his hearers by saying, unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. He prompted his fellow Jews to form a lynch mob by declaring before Abraham was, I am. He touched lepers. He ate with prostitutes, right? He excoriated the ruling class in Jerusalem. He challenged conventional wisdom in a thousand ways. His message, and that of the apostles, was indeed so conciliatory to his contemporaries that they rewarded him with crucifixion and hailed his disciples with stonings, beatings, and martyrdom. So this nonsense about Jesus not ordaining women because of social norms is just, I think, pretty

Starting point is 00:15:35 lame. It seems to me too that if you want to say that Jesus maybe was against ordaining women because those of his day were also, then you're really just accusing Jesus as being a sexist. And I'm not sure that's what you should be doing. But let's look at what the church has said on this because it seems that some people think that the ordination of women could be something, you know, the Pope wakes up tomorrow morning and with a flick of his pen could make it so, and that isn't the case. In 1994, Pope John Paul II formally declared that the church does not have the power to ordain women. Now, before I read you what he said, let me respond to maybe something that you might be thinking.

Starting point is 00:16:26 Why 1994? How come it took this long? Well, the reason that the church that the Eucharist is truly the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, or that Mary was assumed into heaven. The church doesn't come to believe these things when they are officially declared. Rather, they are officially declared when controversy around them arises. when controversy around them arises. So, in 1994, the Pope, John Paul II, declared that the church doesn't have the power to ordain women. And here's what he said, quote, Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more

Starting point is 00:17:26 recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the church's judgment that women are to be admitted to ordination is considered to have merely disciplinary force. Again, right, we're talking here about the lawfulness of it. But listen to what he says here, and this will show you just the authority. When a Pope uses authority in a document to make something very clear, it's clear that he's doing that. So, he says this, Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the church's divine constitution itself in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren.

Starting point is 00:18:11 I declare that the church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the churches faithful. Pretty straightforward. The church doesn't have this sort of authority. And this could be said, too, of the other sacraments. If a church decided, as some did, God forbid, God have mercy, back in the 50s, 60s, 70s, somewhere around then. You would hear of these masses that were called priest, well, I don't know if they were called this,

Starting point is 00:18:50 but they came to be known as pizza and coke masses, where, that's embarrassing even to say it, but these priests, these bad priests, would try to consecrate coke and pizza, and to say that this is now the body of Christ. Well, guess what? They were wrong. The church doesn't have the authority to change the matter of the sacrament. Likewise with baptism. If we decided that tomorrow, not water, but something else was now necessary, like leaves. I don't know why, bathe them in leaves three times. Or if someone changed the words, right? Instead of saying, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, of the Son, of the Holy Spirit. People have in the past done things like, I baptize you in the name of Jesus, right? No,

Starting point is 00:19:45 past done things like, I baptize you in the name of Jesus, right? No, that's invalid. The church does not have the authority. So, far from the church being prideful, right? The church is often accused of being arrogant and prideful because it won't ordain women or it won't do this or it won't do that. No, no, no. The contrary is true. It is the Catholic church which is humble since she recognizes the instruction and the commands of her divine Lord and Savior and dare not go against his teachings. Anyway, in 1995, after this statement was made, a year after this statement was made by Pope John Paul II, the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, in conjunction with the Pope, ruled, just in case there was any doubt, so some people may have read what Pope John Paul II said and went, well, is that binding or not? Well, it is, and here's why. Here's what the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said. This teaching requires definitive assent since founded on the written word of God and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the tradition of the church.

Starting point is 00:20:55 It has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium. So, case closed. That is that. So, you're allowed to think the church is sexist, though you would be wrong. But one thing that is not possible is to have women priests. So, I hope that was the beginning of a help for you. One thing I would like to suggest is an excellent talk from philosopher Dr. Peter Kreeft. It's called Women and the Priesthood, Why Only Boys Can Be the Daddies. And what I'll do is in the description of this podcast, I'll put a link to it. And I recommend that you listen to it. I know we have Protestant listeners, atheist listeners, and maybe you're listening with great curiosity

Starting point is 00:21:42 or great offense. But either way, I would say, look, maybe you don't like how I've explained it. Maybe you don't like Aquinas' explanation. But I think what you and I should both be interested in is what does Jesus want? Jesus ordained men. He didn't ordain women. And so, if it is the will of Jesus Christ that only men be ordained, would you be okay with that? Really? Well, hopefully you would say yes. And maybe you want an argument for that. And maybe what I've shared in this podcast isn't enough. So, as I say, I'll put a link to Dr. Peter Kreef's talk, Why Only the Boys Can Be the Daddies. It's an excellent talk, and I think you'll thoroughly enjoy it. So that does it for this week. I want to thank everybody who rated again last week and congratulations on those again who won the book. Please email me and I will send you over the copy of 20 Answers Atheism.

Starting point is 00:22:38 Please review the podcast if you haven't done that already and tell other people about it. review the podcast if you haven't done that already, and tell other people about it. And I want to thank everybody who has bought my book, Pints with Aquinas, 50 Plus Deep Thoughts from the Angelic Doctor. A lot of people have bought it now, hundreds, and I really appreciate your support. If you haven't yet bought Pints with Aquinas, 50 Plus Deep Thoughts from the Angelic Doctor, go to amazon.com and buy it now by doing that you will support this show okay because it's not free you know i've got to take time out of work to do this i've got to pay to have different accounts in which i upload these different podcasts and this sort of thing and that would be a great support to me but i also know that the book would support you it's

Starting point is 00:23:21 getting great reviews on amazon and people are saying it's a great introduction to aquinas so you can do that and i hope that would be a blessing. And if you do do it, make sure you send me a photo of you drinking a beer and reading the book. It's been so cool to see how many people have done that. If you haven't seen those photos, go to Twitter and type in hashtag PintsWithAquinas and you'll see some photos with people drinking a beer, reading the book. It's been awesome. All right, guys, until next week, may God bless you. See you then. Too many grains of salt and juice

Pints With Aquinas - 22: Why can't women be priests?

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.