Time to remove the gagging order
Women’s ordination
Has the time come to set aside
the ruling in Ordinatio sacerdotalis, issued by Pope John Paul II in
1994, thereby opening up a debate about the ordination of women priests
that he intended expressly to forbid?
John Paul declared: “The
Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on
women,” and went on to order that “this judgement is to be definitively
held by all the Church’s faithful”. It is not disloyalty to that ruling
to ask: what did it mean exactly? The Church expresses its authority
over ordination, and all the other six Sacraments, through its canon
law. For instance, Canon 1031 states: “The presbyterate is not to be
conferred except on those who have completed the twenty-fifth year of
age and possess sufficient maturity …” That could obviously be amended
to change the qualifying age, say, to 27 or 24. Canon 1024 asserts: “A
baptised male alone receives sacred ordination validly.” John Paul II
appeared to be saying that it was impossible for the Church ever to
amend that canon, for instance by inserting “and women” in place of
“alone”. But what if a subsequent pope did so, at the stroke of a pen?
Can one pope bind another in this way? For ever?
These are
reasonable questions. It is safe to say that Pope John Paul II was
appealing to something even more fundamental than canon law, a higher
law. The reason he gave, about Jesus calling only men as his Apostles,
is a reference to the powers that were bestowed on the Church at its
beginning. But it is standard Catholic doctrine that those powers also
gave the Church authority to evolve and adapt. The very notion of
ordination is a later development, as is its separation into three
orders, of deacon, priest and bishop.
It is the Church itself which controls this evolution and this development. So while the Church may indeed have no authority “whatsoever” to confer priestly ordination on women at present, as canon law stands, could it not at some point in the future authorise itself to do so by changing canon law? Does this not precisely describe, for instance, what the Church of England did in 1992?
There are also questions about conscience, truth and human freedom. What exactly is forbidden by Ordinatio sacerdotalis? Clearly individuals who think that the ordination of women would be a good idea cannot be made to stop thinking that. Equally clearly, nor can those who think that the argument from precedent – that the Church has never ordained women and therefore cannot do so in future – is not persuasive enough to be the final word. The ecclesiastical powers that be have tended to assume that John Paul II’s intention was to stop them saying so out loud, whatever they privately thought.
They have interpreted it as, in effect, a gagging order. Are they right to do so, and on what authority? Is it compatible with the Gospel to suppress, and impose sanctions upon, individual Catholics who express what their conscience honestly tells them? Is that faithful to the Founder’s intentions? “Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness’ sake,” he said, “for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.”
No comments:
Post a Comment