22. Vocation is Pure Gift

An Argument Against Priestesses

"Women deserve to be priests, it is their right."

We are all made in the image of God and by grace are called back to him. Historically, one might also recall the ancient maxim of the Church, "Whatever is not assumed, is not redeemed." Christ took upon himself our common human nature so that as our "pontifex" we might have a straight path to bridge the gulf caused by our rebellion. This is also a gift. There is nothing that we have ever done nor about who we are which compelled God to redeem and offer us salvation. Similarly, vocation to diaconate and priesthood are also purely gifts given a few who could never be deserving. In priesthood grace is received but one has already received sanctification in Christian initiation. There is no mandate that one must attempt to collect all the different graces available with the various sacraments. Some are not priests; some are not married; some do not receive the opportunity for anointing; and many of our Protestant brothers and sisters are cut off from sacramental reconciliation-- are they less human or damned because of it? I should hope not. This brings us to the teaching of the priest as an icon for Christ mentioned by myself and improperly portrayed in your data sheets.

Fr. Peter Stravinskas writes: ". . . the reasons for a male priesthood are enhanced by Byzantine theology. When God chose to reveal Himself, He did so through the taking on of human flesh by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity as God's Son. Anyone called to the priesthood since is called as a member of the one and unique priesthood of Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus was the icon (image) of the Father, so is the priest to be an icon of Jesus. This is also tied in with the so-called 'scandal of particularity' which reminds us that God's ways are not our ways. For example, why did God call the Jews and not the Romans or the Greeks, who were certainly better educated and far more cultured? We do not know; nor do we know why men are chosen as instruments of sacramental grace, especially since the qualities they are expected to show forth in their lives are often looked upon as 'feminine' virtues (like patience, humility, kindness). Perhaps the paradox itself contains the answer: God chooses whomever He wills to confound our human expectation and to show what an incredible new order of reality is being established. We must be comfortable in living with mystery" (The Catholic Answer Book, pp. 36-37). We return to my over-riding question, if the acting priest is not a male, and such is counter to Christ's will, can that person signify Christ in a sacramental way? I think not. Of course, in arguing all this, it is taken for granted that maleness is more than testicles, penis, and facial hair; our gender is a given which profoundly informs our whole being.

Fr. Stravinskas notes: ". . . we are not dealing with a question of rights here, for no one (male or female) has a 'right' to ordination. If persons had such a right, the Church would not be able to set any prerequisites for holy orders in regard to health or intelligence or moral living; all that would be necessary would be the assertion of a self-perceived inner call by the individual. No, a call to priesthood is one that comes from the Church and not from the individual. The biggest problem of all, however, is the strange idea that somehow sacramental ordination increases one's holiness or chances at salvation. Neither logic nor experience bears this out. Far from a question of rights, it is really a question of a diversity of roles and ministries in the Church -- all of which are needed for the building up of the Body of Christ. In the natural order a man should not feel inferior to a woman simply because he is incapable of bearing children; his role is different and so it is in the Church" (Ibid., pp. 36-37).