His Holiness said so - that has to be sufficient reason for me.
I am grumbling like you wouldn’t believe here. Understanding, teaching and discussing God’s will does not, to me, seem to require testicles.
I’d appreciate the additional reasons, if you have a moment. Help a brother out here please!
I shan't waste time re-hashing them.
I maintain that, in addition to those explanations, I find that the most powerful practical argument against ordaining women is to be found in the manifest unfitness for ministry of those women who clamour most loudly to be ordained.
“Understanding, teaching and discussing God’s will does not, to me, seem to require testicles.”
Testicles are not the only difference between men and women. We are vastly different in so many ways that one despairs of listing them.
It’s funny: so many people accept that women understand things that men can’t, but utterly reject the notion that there are things men understand that women can’t.
One of those things is a man’s dignity.
A male priest, through study and empathy, can be an entirely satisfactory spiritual guide for women, mutatis mutandis. Women cannot be satisfactory spiritual guides for men. Oh, perhaps they are acceptable to liberal weenie Episcopal eunuchs, but I am talking about men here.
I could go on and on for volumes without repeating myself, but I’m just too bleedin’ tired.
You mentioned accepting the ineligibility of women for the priesthood because the Holy Father said so, but let’s not forget that he didn’t just invent the principle—it’s found in the scriptures.