Madam, _ Canon Michael C Kennedy (August 2nd) puts two questions to “opponents of women’s ordination”. As an Anglican minister, Canon Kennedy would not have the same understanding of ordination that the Catholic Church has held since Apostolic times. Anglican ministers are not priests in the same sense as Catholic priests because the primary function of a priest is to offer a sacrifice – in the Christian tradition, the sacrifice which is offered is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. As the 16th-century Protestant “reformers” rejected the Church’s teaching on the Mass as a sacrifice, the function of a minister in the Anglican Communion is vastly and fundamentally different to that of a Catholic priest.
“What is it in the nature of a woman that is supposed to make it impossible for her to receive the grace of orders?”, asks Canon Kennedy, as if those who oppose women’s ordination are saying that women simply are not “good enough” – no one, man or woman, is worthy to receive Holy Orders; if they were, then they would not be receiving the “grace” of orders. In the Catholic Church, Holy Orders is a sacrament, and one condition for the confection of any sacrament is “valid matter”.
Does Canon Kennedy believe that it would be acceptable to baptise a child with wine instead of water or to use coffee and potato chips instead of bread and wine for the Eucharist? I doubt it, because Christ provided the fundamental formula for baptism, and water is an essential element. Saying that wine is not valid matter for baptism does not mean that it is not a good drink – it simply is not part of the model Christ gave for the sacrament. The same is true of the formula for the Eucharist – the example of Christ and Apostolic teaching show us what is essential for the valid confection of the sacrament.
So, essentially, most Christian denominations hold fast to the Apostolic teaching that certain elements are indispensable for the Eucharist and Baptism, yet some feel that they have the authority to reject the example of Christ and the teaching of the early church fathers when it comes to women “priests”. The church fathers believed that Christ left a model for conferring the sacrament of Holy Orders, as he did for the other sacraments. The Catholic Church, as Pope John Paul II said, did not have the authority to change Christ’s teaching two millenniums ago, and it does not have the authority to do so now.
Finally, I wonder if Canon Kennedy believes there was something lacking in the nature of Mary, the mother of Christ – why did Christ not ordain her to the priesthood? Surely Mary, if Christ had willed it, would have fulfilled the function of priest better than any human – having given Christ his human nature, she is the only human being who could have said the words of the Consecration literally: “This is My Body; This is My Blood”. – Yours, etc,