Search this Site
Home
Contact
Feedback
Mail List
Anti-Catholicism
Catholic Apologetics
Catholic Calendar
Lent
Catholic Perspectives
Catholic Social Teaching
Christology
Church Around the
World
Church Contacts
Church Documents
Church History
Church Law
Church Teaching
Demonology
Doctors of the Church
Ecumenism
Eschatology
(Death, Heaven,
Purgatory, Hell)
Essays on Science
Evangelization
Fathers of the Church
Free Catholic Pamphlets
Heresies
and Falsehoods
Let There Be Light
Q & A on the Catholic Faith
Links
Liturgy
Mariology
Marriage & the Family
Modern Martyrs
Moral Theology
New Age
Occult
Political Issues
Prayer and Devotions
Pro-Life
Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults
Sacraments
Scripture
Spirituality
The
Golden Legend
Vatican
Vocation Links
& Articles
What the Cardinals believe...
World Religions
Pope John Paul II
In Memoriam
John Paul II
Beatification
Pope Benedict XVI
In Celebration

| |
Concerning the CDF Reply
Regarding Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
October 28, 1995
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
The publication of the Reply of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith to a dubium regarding the reason for which the teaching contained in
the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is to be considered definitive
tenenda seems the appropriate moment to offer certain reflections.
The ecclesiological significance of this Apostolic Letter was underscored
even by its date of publication, for it was on that day, May 22, 1994, that
the Church celebrated the Solemnity of Pentecost. Its importance, however,
could be discovered above all in the concluding words of the Letter: "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 (cf.
Lk 22:32) 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 Church's
faithful" (n. 4).
The Pope's intervention was necessary not simply to reiterate the validity
of a discipline observed in the Church from the beginning, but to confirm a
doctrine "preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church
and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents," which
"pertains to the Church's divine consitution itself" (n. 4). In this way,
the Holy Father intended to make clear that the teaching that priestly
ordination is to be reserved solely to men could not be considered "open to
debate" and neither could one attribute to the decision of the Church "a
merely disciplinary force" (ibid).
The fruits of this Letter have been evident since its publication. Many
consciences which in good faith had been disturbed, more by doubt than by
uncertainty, found serenity once again thanks to the teaching of the Holy
Father. However, some perplexity continued, not only among those who,
distant from the Catholic faith, do not accept the existence of a doctrinal
authority within the Church -- that is, a Magisterium sacramentally invested
with the authority of Christ (cf. Lumen Gentium, 21) -- but also among some
of the faithful to whom it continued to seem that the exclusion of women
from the priestly ministry represents a form of injustice or discrimination
against them. Some objected that it is not evident from Revelation that such
an exclusion was the will of Christ for his Church, and others had questions
concerning the assent owed to the Letter.
Certainly, the understanding of the reasons for which the Church does not
have the power to confer priestly ordination on women can be deepened
further. Such reasons, for example, have been set out already in the
Declaration Inter Insigniores (October 15, 1976), issued by the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith and approved by Pope Paul VI, and in a number
of the documents of John Paul II (for example, Christifideles Laici, 51;
Mulieris Dignitatem, 26), as well as in the Catechism of the Catholic
Church, No. 1577). But in any case it cannot be forgotten that the Church
teaches, as an absolutely fundamental truth of Christian anthropology, the
equal personal dignity of men and women, and the necessity of overcoming and
doing away with "every type of discrimination regarding fundamental rights"
(Gaudium et Spes, 29). It is in the light of this truth that one can seek to
understand better the teaching that women cannot receive priestly
ordination. A correct theology can prescind neither from one nor from the
other of these doctrines, but must hold the two together; only thus will it
be able to deepen our comprehension of God's plan regarding woman and
regarding the priesthood -- and hence, regarding the mission of woman in the
Church. If however, perhaps by allowing oneself to be conditioned too much
by the ways and spirit of the age, one should assert that a contradiction
exists between these two truths, the way of progress in the intelligence of
the faith would be lost.
In the Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis the Pope focuses attention on the figu
of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and Mother of the Church. The
fact that she "received neither the mission proper to the Apostles nor the
ministerial priesthood clearly shows that the non-admission of women to
priestly ordination cannot mean that women are of lesser dignity, nor can it
be construed as discrimination against them" (n. 3). Diversity of mission in
no way compromises equality of personal dignity.
Furthermore, to understand that this teaching implies no injustice or
discrimination against women, one has to consider the nature of the
ministerial priesthood itself, which is a service and not a position of
privilege or human power over others. Whoever, man or woman, conceives of
the priesthood in terms of personal affirmation, as a goal or point of
departure in a career of human success, is profoundly mistaken, for the true
meaning of Christian priesthood, whether it be the common priesthood of the
faithful or, in a most special way, the ministerial priesthood, can only be
found in the sacrifice of one's own being in union with Christ, in service
of the brethren. Priestly ministry constitutes neither the universal ideal
nor, even less, the goal of Christian life. In this connection, it is
helpful to recall once again that "the only higher gift, which can and must
be desired, is charity" (cf.
1 Cor. 12:13; Inter Insigniores).
With respect to its foundation in Sacred Scripture and in Tradition, John
Paul II directs his attention to the fact that the Lord Jesus, as is
witnessed by the New Testament, called only men, and not women, to the
ordained ministry, and that the Apostles "did the same when they chose
fellow workers who would succeed them in their ministry" (n. 2; cf.
1 Tim.
3:1ff;
2 Tim. 1:6;
Tit. 1:5). There are sound arguments supporting the fact
that Christ's way of acting was not determined by cultural motives (cf. n.
2), as there are also sufficient grounds to state that Tradition has
interpreted the choice made by the Lord as binding for the Church of all
times.
Here, however, we find ourselves before the essential interdependence of
Holy Scripture and Tradition, an interdependence which makes of these two
forms of the transmission of the Gospel an unbreakable unity with the
Magisterium, which is an integral part of Tradition and is entrusted with
the authentic interpretation of the Word of God, written and handed down
(Dei Verbum, 9 and 10). In the specific case of priestly ordination, the
successors of the Apostles have always observed the norm of conferring it
only on men, and the Magisterium, assisted by the Holy Spirit, teaches us
that this did not occur by chance, habitual repetition, subjection to
sociological conditioning, or even less because of some imaginary
inferiority of women; but rather because "the Church has always acknowledged
as a perennial norm her Lord's way of acting in choosing the twelve men whom
he made the foundation of his Church" (n. 2).
As is well known, there are reasons ex convenientia by which theology has
sought and seeks to understand the reasonableness of the will of the Lord.
Such reasons, expounded for example in the Declaration Inter Insigniores,
have their undoubted value, and yet they are not conceived or employed as if
they were strictly logical proofs derived from absolute principles. At the
same time, it is important to keep in mind, as these reasons help us to
comprehend, that the human will of Christ not only is not arbitrary, but
that it is intimately united with the divine will of the eternal Son, on
which the ontological and anthropological truth of the creation of the two
sexes depends.
In response to this precise act of the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff,
explicitly addressed to the entire Catholic Church, all members of the
faithful are required to give their assent to the teaching stated therein.
To this end, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the
approval of the Holy Father, has given an official Reply on the nature of
this assent; it is a matter of full definitive assent, that is to say,
irrevocable, to a doctrine taught infallibly by the Church. In fact, as the
Reply explains, the definitive nature of this assent derives from the truth
of the doctrine itself, since, founded on the written Word of God, and
constantly held and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set
forth infallibly by the ordinary universal Magisterium (cf. Lumen Gentium,
25). Thus, the Reply specifies that this doctrine belongs to the deposit of
the faith of the Church. It should be emphasized that the definitive and
infallible nature of this teaching of the Church did not arise with the
publication of the Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. In the Letter, as the
Reply of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also explains, the
Roman Pontiff, having taken account of present circumstances, has confirmed
the same teaching by a formal declaration, giving expression once again to
quod semper, quod ubique et quod ab omnibus tenendum est, utpote ad fidei
depositum pertinens. In this case, an act of the ordinary Papal Magisterium,
in itself not infallible, witnesses to the infallibility of the teaching of
a doctrine already possessed by the Church.
Finally, there have been some commentaries on the Letter Ordinatio
Sacerdotalis which have suggested that the document constitutes an
additional and inopportune obstacle on the already difficult path of
ecumenism. In this regard, it should not be forgotten that according to both
the letter and the spirit of the Second Vatican Council (cf. Unitatis
Redintegratio, 11), the authentic ecumenical task, to which the Catholic
Church is unequivocally and permanently committed, requires complete
sincerity and clarity in the presentation of one's own faith. Furthermore,
it should be noted that the doctrine reaffirmed by the Letter Ordinatio
Sacerdotalis cannot but further the pursuit of full communion with the
Orthodox Churches which, in fidelity to Tradition, have maintained and
continue to maintain the same teaching.
The singular originality of the Church and of the priestly ministry within
the Church requires a precise clarity of criteria. Concretely, one must
never lose sight of the fact that the Church does not find the source of her
faith and her constitutive structure in the principles of the social order
of any historical period. While attentive to the world in which she lives
and for whose salvation she labours, the Church is conscious of being the
bearer of a higher fidelity to which she is bound. It is a question of a
radical faithfulness to the Word of God which she has received from Christ
who established her to last until the end of the ages. This Word of God, in
proclaiming the essential value and eternal destiny of every person, reveals
the ultimate foundation of the dignity of every human being, of every woman
and of every man.
+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect
12/7/95
| |
|