Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ignatius J Reilly

I am glad to hear you will be attending Mass.

The only answer I can provide for your question is that "Tradition" is not merely a manmade way of preserving that which has always been done. Instead, it is the fundamental way in which Catholic doctrine is passed along through the ages. It is the very essence of the Church. Scripture itself is part of Tradition - in fact, it was in part because the writings that constitute the New Testament reflected the teachings of Tradition that they were considered canonical in the first place. Other books that claimed to have been written by apostles but did not match the teachings of Church Tradition were thrown out. Tradition is that important.

Thus, we must hesistate when asked to consider changes that conflict with Tradition, not out of a mere desire to stay "loyal to the past" but rather out of a need to remain faithful to the institutions created by Christ. The Church does not merely hold that it is "wrong" to consecrate a woman, but rather that it is incapable of doing so in the first place.

Every sacrament requires proper matter, form, and intent. Matter is the physical aspect of a sacrament, such as bread and wine for the Eucharist, water for Baptism, and oil for the Annointing of the Sick. Form is the rituals and actions connected to the matter. Intent is the will in the minister of the sacrament to do what the Church does.

The matter for the Sacrament of Holy Orders (consecration) is a baptised male. The matter of any sacrament is defined in a precise way. According to Catholic theology, a female is not proper matter for the sacrament. To allow the ordination of women involves a fundamental change in Catholic theology as it has been defined throughout the centuries, and basically presumes an error in a matter where the Church is presumed infallible. Thus, Catholics such as myself oppose the ordination of women because it is in contradiction to the defined doctrine of our Church.

I hope this answers your question to some degree.


42 posted on 04/08/2005 9:21:42 AM PDT by MWS (Errare humanum est, in errore perservare stultum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: MWS; Ignatius J Reilly

I should also add that it is for much of the same reason that we cannot accept homosexual marriage, as the matter of that sacrament is one man and one woman. The theology underlying the sacraments is not subject to change, as it is understood to be part of the infallible teaching of the Church.


43 posted on 04/08/2005 9:23:42 AM PDT by MWS (Errare humanum est, in errore perservare stultum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson