It’s not about a Female Priesthood: Feminism and Catholicism
A conversation between an ex-catholic feminist and a catholic almost-feminist, with the author as moderator.
Every part of this interaction is real aside from the parts that are completely ✨made up✨. References will be provided for the adventurous but gasps, smirks, laughs and lamentations are free for all.
Uro* and Nadi* are seated facing each other. My chair is a bit further back making us into a human triangle. I’m here to document what they think. I am a neutral (as can be) scribe and an occasional nuisance.
We go over the ground rules: receive (the message), respect (the person), repeat (to clarify), reply.
I press a ‘ding’ button on my phone. Alors on danse (avec des mots)!.
Nadi: Hello Uro, can I ask when you stopped being Catholic? Or rather a practising Catholic?
Uro: Yeah that’s fine. About three years now.
Nadi: Why though?
Uro: I didn’t really experience peace there.
Nadi: Did you search for it?
Me: That’s confrontational. Back it up.
Uro: I can handle that but I’ll do my own back.
*laughter*
Yes I searched. In fact, I’m still searching. My turn! So why aren’t you a feminist yet?
N: Define feminism.
U: Working for the advancement of women.
N: Isn’t that what Buchi Emecheta said just before she added “but I’m not a feminist?”
U: Yes, but regardless of what she said, that is feminism.
N: If I accept that, shebi you know that what different groups of women consider as ‘advancement’ is different?
U: Understandable. Humans are a kaleidoscope of cultures and perspectives.
N: Opoor! Aristotle. I like that. However, perspectives clash. Especially in feminism. Is there a bridge connecting all perspectives of women’s advancement?
U: Absolute equality.
N: With men? In nature, dignity or both?
U: Absolute equality in nature is impossible between men and women. We are humans not objects with one prototype and then clones. So dignity.
N: You know some perspectives might argue that first statement yeah?
U: Of course, but no one can argue with dignity.
N: *smiles* Feminism is a revolution of dignity. I can get behind that. In fact I think I already am.
U: And here I thought you would be trying to convert me instead!
*laughter*
N: I don’t think it’s conversion. I think it’s understanding.
U: Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.
M: You people know I have literature review to do ahbi?
U: *raises hands* Scholar! We are loyal!
M: No let thunder fire you for dia. Enter this discussion!
U: Farabale! So Nadi, our new feminist, if men and women are truly equal in dignity as you’ve agreed with me. Isn’t it unfair that women aren’t allowed to be priests? In the Catholic Church at least.
N: Hmmm. It isn’t really a question of being allowed by the Pope, for instance, or the Magisterium. It’s simply that women are not called to the priesthood.
U: Aren’t we all a royal priesthood and holy nation?
N: I like you already. Yes we are. But there’s a difference between the general priesthood and the sacramental priesthood.
U: Do I have to ask you to explain?
N: I was hoping you already knew. The general priesthood applies to every baptised person. Through baptism we share in the life of Christ. Christ is King, Priest and Prophet. So we too are royal in that we are children of the King. Priests because we pray and offer sacrifices for ourselves and others. Prophets because by living an authentic Christian life we allude to the perfection of Heaven. Sacramental priesthood is special because it comes with power to do all Christ did while he was on earth, including convert bread and wine to his body and blood — so Mass.
U: Okay, special and non-special priesthood. I’m with you so far. Why can’t women be ‘special’ and have this ‘power’?
N: Sacramental priests stand ‘in the person of Christ’. Jesus came as a man. Can you REALLY stand “in person” of someone when you are not really the same type of person?
U: By that argument, priests should only be from the Middle East or wherever Narazeth is. Because ethnicity is a ‘type’ of people.
N: *laughs* okay that was a low hanging fruit.
U: Try dey rate me.
N: I hear. Let’s look at it this way. From the Old Testament, the fathers of households have always been the priests of each family. Then as the family grew to become a clan, the father remained the priest and when he died, it would be his son. Then God started anointing priests and prophets and they were still men.
U: So God is sexist? Or at least, according to Catholics?
M: Accusatory. Dial it down.
U: *shrugs
N: If God was sexist, according to Catholics, Mary wouldn’t be MARY. Second to the Trinity and all that.
U: You know say Mary matter dey always cause problem?
N: But we are talking about the Catholic Church now. And that is what she is here. So it would be stupid for this ‘our’ God that elevated her like that to be sexist.
U: So maybe it’s not God or ‘your’ God. Because come to think of it, God did not reveal everything till Jesus came. So from the Old testament till Jesus, a lot of that stuff was rooted in human traditions. Like slavery for instance! Ain’t nobody start talking about the Truth setting you free FREE or no one truly being a master over others until Jesus came spitting.
N: Word.
U: So walk with me. Jesus called women too, they were among his disciples. Mary Madaglene and the other Marys yeah? Heck! They were the only ones at the cross — no offence to John but I mean c’mon he was 1% out of 100; and women were first to see Jesus risen from the dead? Seems like we are continuing human traditions — which have always been biased against women-rather than the divine tradition.
N: You mentioned something. That women were disciples. Yup but none was called to be part of the 12.
U: But aren’t the 12 symbolic of the 12 tribes of Isreal, ergo 12 sons of Jacob? Since Jesus was in this patriarchal society, he used ‘patriarchs’ to reach people. That’s marketing strategy dear.
N: But Jesus was a radical. He was out there causing Pharisees to tear their garments. If he wanted to make women part of the 12 he would have. After all, God used women to lead his people in the old testament. He just gave men and women different roles. That’s why now we have reverend fathers and reverend sisters!
U: But do they do the same things? Do they have the same prestige and recognition?
N: It’s not about prestige you know? It’s about service.
U: Tell that to the priests cosplaying Alpha and Omega in their parishes.
N: They are anomalies.
U: They are people’s lived experiences.
N: And that’s sad and wrong. But really, the only thing that reverend sisters can’t do is celebrate Mass. Okay they can’t hear confessions either but they can give spiritual direction, and even lead congregations the size of a diocese or greater.
U: If you’re talking about Mother Superiors leading big religious groups, that doesn’t count. It’s usually all women and not regular everyday people.
N: So women don’t count now?
U: Okay that one enter. But you know what I mean though. That power does not extend to the rest of Catholic society the way it does for priests.
N: So we’re talking about sociopolitical power now?
U: Yes! Special fancy Mass powers bring sociopolitical power in the Catholic community and women don’t have that as much as men. Not even 20%.
N: *laughs* You should really meet the CWO at my parish.
U: I’m not talking about your parish babe. I’m talking about the global Church. Do you know one of the things that took my peace away in Church?
N: You have my attention.
U: Priests abusing power. Of all things to be doing, raping children too? And covering it up? FOR BLOODY YEARS UNEND. Give me a break!
M: Hei o! Tone! Turn it down a notch. No be Nadi do am.
U: Sorry. I know. I just mean, the people who cover for these men in the Church are other men. And they can do that because they have the power. If a priest molests you and you report to whoever is in charge of him, who is also a man, what do you think will happen? Exactly what has been happening! Did you hear about Califonia? I found out on CNN! Not Lumen Christi o. C-N-freaking-N. Babe!
N: It sucks. It’s evil actually. But you make it sound like women don’t cover abuse too or aren’t abusers?
U: That’s because I’m talking about the Church and the abuse by women is far less than that of men. And you know what? I was reading a book about your St John Paul II, and the journalist writing it said that even though he was great, he should have focused a lot more on tackling the issues within rather than without. And she was like, if more men were answerable to women in the Church, the abuse will probably not be this catastrophic. And I agree! That is why women should be priests too.
N: Jam brake small, na express you wan enter. Should women really HAVE to be priests to be able to hold men accountable in the Church?
U: Your Church is structured so priests run things. Priests are men. Na who dey run things dey hold people accountable.
N: I see your point. But, what if the women in the Church, especially reverend sisters who have dedicated their lives to the Church, be given more let’s say administrative or ‘political’ power, wouldn’t that be better than just riding an absolute-equality-in-nature train here? As per, it doesn’t matter if you’re man or woman, you can be a priest, when God obviously choose different ‘natures’ for different ‘roles’?
U: And how do we know that God MADE this choice, is it not by the testimony of the men who wrote 95% of the Bible?
N: Men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
U: Still men! See David for instance, is it only what God’s wisdom directed him to do that he did? Does Uriah ring a bell? Haba!
N: I get that but God showed he was displeased with him ahbi? And then made him switch up through a prophet. If God wanted women priests, wouldn’t he send a sign? I mean there are apparitions every now and then with messages and prophecies. The Divine Mercy with St Faustina, The Immaculate Conception with St Bernadette, Guadalupe with St Juan Diego; don’t you think God would have said something?
U: What makes you think he isn’t using people like me to say something now?
N: Valid but I’m talking about an extraordinary sign here. Have there been any?
U: Doesn’t an extraordinary sign have to be TRULY declared as extraordinary after extensive research by the Church? Research which just so happens to be lead by men?
N: *laughs* You give men too much power. You aren’t giving God his accolades. If Baba wan talk, e go talk. And you know that many times the people know before the magisterium. Just like in Lourdes with St Bernadette. The whole town was going there to pray even when they couldn’t see the apparition. The magisterium tried to shut it down but they got a divine sign and fell in line.
U: Was the rhyme intended?
N: Divinely inspired.
*laughter*
U: I understand you but I don’t think I agree.
N: But we should have a bridge yes? Between our perspectives?
U: I think we do. The fact that women DO need more power in the Church. That way a lot of nonsense can stop.
N: Esohe, didn’t you write a something like that recently?
M: Eis! No carry me enter the matter.
U: *laughs* So that’s the bridge.
N: Then it’s not really about a female priesthood per se, at least from your point of view. It’s more about access to power. And since that access doesn’t HAVE to be the priesthood then…
U: Yeah. I guess so. But it could be.
N: Should it be?
We will leave you to answer the last yourself.
P.S: I don’t know if you noticed, but there’s a comment box below.
P.P.S: There’s also a clap and share button, just so you know.
P.P.P.S: Thank you for reading. Try not to ask what their real names are.
