Vatican Says that Ordaining Women Priests is a Crime Like Sex Abuse of Children

[Trigger]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07...ms_ss=facebook

Catholic News Service Story

New rules the Vatican is expected to issue soon on penalties for priests who sexually abuse children will also put the ordaining of women in the same category of the most serious crimes under church law.

Ordaining women is comparable to sexually abusing children?! SERIOUSLY?

Gadzooks, the Vatican really messed up on this one. Offensive on so many levels.

[cappuccinosmom]

Reading further in the article:

Pope John Paul's 2001 document distinguished between two types of "most grave crimes," those committed in the celebration of the sacraments and those committed against morals. Among the sacramental crimes were such things as desecration of the Eucharist and violation of the seal of confession.

Under the new revisions, the "attempted ordination of women" will be listed among those crimes, as a serious violation of the sacrament of holy orders, informed sources said. As such, it will be handled under the procedures set up for investigating "delicta graviora" under the control of the doctrinal congregation.

Other items dealt with in the document are things like breaking the seal of confession, with modern technology being a development that needs to be addressed in regards to confession and confidentiality.

So, it's not actually being compared or categorized with sexual abuse. These "crimes" are split into two categories, as explained. The ordination of women would fall under the sacramental category rather than the moral moral one.

Also in the article:

Vatican officials emphasized that simply because women's ordination was treated in the same document as priestly sex abuse did not mean the two acts were somehow equivalent in the eyes of the church.

Whether one agrees with the decision or not, I do think it's important to make sure all the facts are clearly presented. What you could say in disagreement is that the ordination of women is not comparable to the desecration of the Eucharist. For the purposes of arguments against these rules, that would be a more accurate description of classifications here. You can see details of other "liturgical abuses" HERE. It has nothing at all to do with sexual ethics/morals.

[Trigger]

From our parish bulletin (reprinted with permission):

It really doesn't matter where you stand on the issue of ordaining women as priests, this action by our hierarchal leadership diminishes the absolute evil of pedophilia by marrying it to a non-criminal action that stands in the Biblical, theological and ecclesiological arena. It is also worth noting that the discussion on the ordination of women, while denounced/prohibited by Rome, is not couched in the language of an infallible teaching.

Penned by our permanent Deacon/Pastoral Admin.

[umsami]

I think it was a major major PR flaw to have the two linked in any way.

Sadly, it does seem that in the past, the Vatican has viewed women's issues (ordination, "uppity" nuns, abortion) as more serious than the abuse of children.

I mean, just recently an extremely well-respected nun, Sister Margaret McBride, was excommunicated for saving a mother's life by allowing the termination of a pregnancy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/op...27kristof.html

She was excommuniated rather quickly--yet known pedophile priests have remained on-staff for years upon end.

I remember back during the election one Cardinal saying that he would not allow a pro-choice politician communion. (Think it was a Kennedy, but not Edward.) : Yet, priests who abused children not only received communion, but gave it to others... heard confessions...etc.

I know that there are Priests and other Vatican officials who are troubled by pedophile priests... and not just because of the bad PR and financial drain they put on the Church. Sadly, it just seems that they are not in power.

[lovebug]

i am a little in shock at how they worded it. a crime? really? i think that is way over the top to say the least!

i dont think women should be priests. but that is just my view and it is so much more then it look on the top. i have many reasons i think that! and its because women are amazing in so many ways and that i think allowing this would diminish that!

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by lovebug

i am a little in shock at how they worded it. a crime? really? i think that is way over the top to say the least!

i dont think women should be priests. but that is just my view and it is so much more then it look on the top. i have many reasons i think that! and its because women are amazing in so many ways and that i think allowing this would diminish that!

How so? I'm genuinely curious to know why you feel this way.

[lovebug]

Originally Posted by Trigger

How so? I'm genuinely curious to know why you feel this way.

i dont really want to get into it here on the mothering message board... but in short...

as the bible says the women place is the home (whatever that means to her) and she is the make it or break it for family life. with out a women you cant have a family. she does not need to be tied down that heavy to the church. she need to be free to do what god made her for!

[umsami]

Originally Posted by lovebug

i dont really want to get into it here on the mothering message board... but in short...

as the bible says the women place is the home (whatever that means to her) and she is the make it or break it for family life. with out a women you cant have a family. she does not need to be tied down that heavy to the church. she need to be free to do what god made her for!

But aren't the women most likely to be ordained already nuns... so they've either committed themselves to a life of celibacy and have never married or have taken orders presumably after the dissolution of a marriage and any children are grown?

I know that those who are against women priests use the 1 Cor argument about women not speaking or teaching in church.

(BTW, there are very traditional Christian Mamas on the board who do believe that women should not be pastors/priests, etc. So, just because some MDC Mamas may seem super liberal non-traditional... there's actually a big mix. It's actually quite nice that women from a variety of religious, socioeconomic, racial, etc. backgrounds all agree on natural parenting. )

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by lovebug

i dont really want to get into it here on the mothering message board... but in short...

as the bible says the women place is the home (whatever that means to her) and she is the make it or break it for family life. with out a women you cant have a family. she does not need to be tied down that heavy to the church. she need to be free to do what god made her for!

What if God made her to be a priest? Not being sarcastic either (despite the desire to be as you did just say my family is not a family). Some women do feel a strong, God-given sense that their reason in this world is to their faith (which is why we have nuns) and for some of those women, that feeling may include a strong desire to guide a parish. What about her make her less suited to the job than a man with the same sense of his reason for being here?

[lovebug]

Originally Posted by umsami

But aren't the women most likely to be ordained already nuns... so they've either committed themselves to a life of celibacy and have never married or have taken orders presumably after the dissolution of a marriage and any children are grown?

I know that those who are against women priests use the 1 Cor argument about women not speaking or teaching in church.

(BTW, there are very traditional Christian Mamas on the board who do believe that women should not be pastors/priests, etc. So, just because some MDC Mamas may seem super liberal non-traditional... there's actually a big mix. It's actually quite nice that women from a variety of religious, socioeconomic, racial, etc. backgrounds all agree on natural parenting. )

my point was more that i dont like to get into this type of talk on any board. its a topic of HUGE debate and i really dont want to get into it. i have been on mothering for may years and understand the boards well. i choose to come here for other reason and this is just not one of them. i dont have the time to type out everything i think on this topic....

Originally Posted by MusicianDad

What if God made her to be a priest? Not being sarcastic either (despite the desire to be as you did just say my family is not a family). Some women do feel a strong, God-given sense that their reason in this world is to their faith (which is why we have nuns) and for some of those women, that feeling may include a strong desire to guide a parish. What about her make her less suited to the job than a man with the same sense of his reason for being here?

did a women carry any of your kiddos? if so then my point still stands... your family is VERY MUCH a family, just like mine is.

i will no be returning to this debate. i dont have the energy to debate this... i still stand by my idea that i agree with the church.

[Trigger]

It's a shame you won't discuss this, lovebug. It's an interesting topic, and everyone deserves their opinion.

Originally Posted by lovebug

i dont really want to get into it here on the mothering message board... but in short...

as the bible says the women place is the home (whatever that means to her) and she is the make it or break it for family life. with out a women you cant have a family. she does not need to be tied down that heavy to the church. she need to be free to do what god made her for!

Remember though, that much of the Christian Scriptures were written in the context of specific cultural teaching purposes; and edited/interpreted by a very patriarchal church. A lot has been omitted, in regard to women.

Counter arguments to your vague citation, also found in Scripture, would include Lydia the seller of purple cloth and the "Ideal Wife" so highly praised in Psalm 31 - certainly no homebody, yet a "worthy wife" and an "unfailing prize" whose "value is far beyond pearls" and whose "children rise up and praise her".

She picks out a field to purchase; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.

...

She enjoys the success of her dealings;

...

She reaches out her hands to the poor, and extends her arms to the needy.

...


Mary Magdalene (whose feast day is this week - 7/22 ) is another excellent example. She is acknowledged by the Church as "the first evangelist", the "Apostle to the Apostles"; and most theologians agree that she (among other women) was an active and important disciple of Christ.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by lovebug

my point was more that i dont like to get into this type of talk on any board. its a topic of HUGE debate and i really dont want to get into it. i have been on mothering for may years and understand the boards well. i choose to come here for other reason and this is just not one of them. i dont have the time to type out everything i think on this topic....

did a women carry any of your kiddos? if so then my point still stands... your family is VERY MUCH a family, just like mine is.

i will no be returning to this debate. i dont have the energy to debate this... i still stand by my idea that i agree with the church.

If you're talking about the reproduction side, than your logic still doesn't fit because you need a man to reproduce too... So should men not be ordained as priests? Or only the ones willing to live a celibate life? What about women willing to live a celibate life? I mean, for centuries priests haven't been allowed to marry, so the family aspect isn't even an issue. One would assume that a female priest would need to follow to same rules as the male priest including no marriage and no sex.

[BMG580]

It really doesn't matter where you stand on the issue of ordaining women as priests, this action by our hierarchal leadership diminishes the absolute evil of pedophilia by marrying it to a non-criminal action that stands in the Biblical, theological and ecclesiological arena. It is also worth noting that the discussion on the ordination of women, while denounced/prohibited by Rome, is not couched in the language of an infallible teaching.

I am a recent convert and I was so dismayed to see the two issues joined. Obviously both are grave matters. The ordination of women into the priesthood challenges the doctrines dictating the requirements for the sacrament of Holy Orders.

However, the degradation and abuse of children by priests is so unbelievably unacceptable and horrifying and the Church should make firm proclamations about just that issue and leave other issues out of it. For those looking in from the outside who have almost no knowledge of Church history and theology the idea that the two could be equated is shocking.

[moonshoes]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad

What if God made her to be a priest? Not being sarcastic either (despite the desire to be as you did just say my family is not a family). Some women do feel a strong, God-given sense that their reason in this world is to their faith (which is why we have nuns) and for some of those women, that feeling may include a strong desire to guide a parish. What about her make her less suited to the job than a man with the same sense of his reason for being here?

I just have to clarify something. We don't have nuns because women aren't "allowed" to be priests. We have nuns because these women are called to the religious life by God. Their vocation is the religious life. There are many men called to religious life who are brothers, not priests. The priesthood is the priesthood, consecrated religious life is consecrated religious life. Two very different vocations.

The Magisterium has repeatedly stated that women are not called to the priesthood ever since Jesus chose his apostles. It is not up to individual priests to attempt to ordain women, and this is what the Vatican is talking about. This is a very serious matter, and will be treated as such. It is unfortunate they haven't been as strident with other matters, but it doesn't change the significance of this one.

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by Charbeau

I am a recent convert and I was so dismayed to see the two issues joined. Obviously both are grave matters. The ordination of women into the priesthood challenges the doctrines dictating the requirements for the sacrament of Holy Orders.

However, the degradation and abuse of children by priests is so unbelievably unacceptable and horrifying and the Church should make firm proclamations about just that issue and leave other issues out of it. For those looking in from the outside who have almost no knowledge of Church history and theology the idea that the two could be equated is shocking.

I'm not sure if you were referring to yourself, but this is an awesome book on Church history, if you are interested.

moonshoes - Just wanted to clarify that a true, spiritual "calling" is a personal & individual gift, and not something that can be regulated or dismissed by anyone, including the Magesterium.

Also, the office of Deacon is an ordained one. Scripture makes reference to at least one female deacon - Phoebe - so common sense would tell us that there were certainly female leaders in the early church (and, for the record, there were NO priests in the early years of the Catholic Church).

[BMG580]

Originally Posted by Trigger

I'm not sure if you were referring to yourself, but this is an awesome book on Church history, if you are interested.

No, I wasn't referring to myself. I wouldn't have converted if I hadn't studied the Church and its theology pretty thoroughly!

My friends and family are not very knowledgable though, and I got a lot of emails this week concerned about how I could be a member of a church who equated the sexual abuse of children with the ordination of females.

[cappuccinosmom]

Am I crazy, or am I just the only one that saw that this document does not "join" the two issues or compare them, but deals with a number of different issues, in two distinct and seperate categories, one moral, and one liturgical?

[moonshoes]

Originally Posted by Trigger

I'm not sure if you were referring to yourself, but this is an awesome book on Church history, if you are interested.

moonshoes - Just wanted to clarify that a true, spiritual "calling" is a personal & individual gift, and not something that can be regulated or dismissed by anyone, including the Magesterium.

Also, the office of Deacon is an ordained one. Scripture makes reference to at least one female deacon - Phoebe - so common sense would tell us that there were certainly female leaders in the early church (and, for the record, there were NO priests in the early years of the Catholic Church).

Well, that is one interpretation, however, as Catholics we are to submit to the authority of the Magisterium and it has decreed that women are not to be ordained. Period. We are called to our vocations by God, not the Magisterium, but God has given the Church authority on earth. Whether or not we agree with it's decisions, we can't just go around doing whatever we want.

I agree there were female deacons in the early Church. I agree the priesthood evolved over time. Don't see what it has to do with the subject. Will women eventually be ordained to the priesthood? Maybe. Maybe not. But we can't just go around ordaining women. That is what this is about.

[moonshoes]

Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom

Am I crazy, or am I just the only one that saw that this document does not "join" the two issues or compare them, but deals with a number of different issues, in two distinct and seperate categories, one moral, and one liturgical?

no, you are not crazy. You are correct.

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom

So, it's not actually being compared or categorized with sexual abuse. These "crimes" are split into two categories, as explained. The ordination of women would fall under the sacramental category rather than the moral moral one.

... this document does not "join" the two issues or compare them, but deals with a number of different issues, in two distinct and seperate categories, one moral, and one liturgical

With all due respect, I must disagree. The fact that they are categorized as "liturgical" abuses vs. "moral" abuses does not diminsh the fact that they are both considered a CRIME of equal standing in the Church.

From the CNS article:

it will include the "attempted ordination of women" among the list of most serious crimes against church law, or "delicta graviora,"

I guess it's a POV thing. I support women's ordination, so I find it highly offensive when it's called a "crime" and compared in ANY way to sexual abuse/pedophilia. And,

this action ... diminishes the absolute evil of pedophilia

which is offensive to victims of such, and their families.