upvote
The textbook answer, not that I am agreeing with it, is that no women priests is not a choice that the Catholic Church makes, but rather a reflection of received wisdom and ground truth. The same way perhaps a man is understood to be unable to get pregnant, a woman is understood to be unable to perform the sacraments. Or as John Paul II stated in 1994, “the church has no authority whatsoever to ordain women” even if it wanted to
reply
Many Catholic believers are huge stickers for tradition. The previous Pope didn't go nearly so far as to allow female clergy, and he was not viewed with respect by many conservative Catholics. If the Pope declared that the church must allow female clergy, and if that didn't cause a literal schism, he would nevertheless lose the respect of most Catholics who didn't already agree with him.

If the Pope decides that it doesn't actually accomplish much good to force the issue when Catholics as a whole aren't ready for it, he could either try to advance women's rights without tipping the boat over, or he could just not bother.

This Pope is choosing to try to be a voice for good, and seems to do so from a deep desire for moral justice in an imperfect world. I'm grateful for that.

reply
That reads a bit like: an equal role in external politics, but not in internal church politics. It’s hard to have a role in politics if you don’t have a voice.
reply
Your argument is a bit stretched. Women had and have a principal role in catholicism, the fact that cannot be priest is not that important or seen as discrimination.
reply
Oh my, I assume you are male?

Just declaring the discrimination to be "not that important" is quite typical then (as it does not affect you) and well, my catholic aunt would disagree, but she is not important.

May I ask, what the principal role of women is in catholocism, besides being good mothers?

reply
Politics, football (soccer) and religion are always very sensitive topics.

Maybe the OP's "not that important" was an unfortunate way to put it.

I think the answers you ask for are in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis[0]

[0] https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_letters...

reply
> the fact that cannot be priest is not that important or seen as discrimination.

Says who, exactly?

reply
Catholics.
reply
In this case spiritual and political are one in the same.
reply
Only if this is also the Pope declaring that women can be priests.
reply
I'm simply pointing out that it's a ecclesiastical monarchy. Political office and religious authority are intertwined. One woman has reached a cabinet level position as of 2025, something allowed for the first time in 2022. Even she can't perform the full duties of her job because they require a title only a man can be granted.
reply
You speak as if the Pope can just change that unilaterally, with no cost.

Now, I don't know if Pope Leo actually believes in the full equality of men and women or if he's really being a hypocrite here. It's fully possible that you're absolutely right to scoff at him for it.

But the thing is, the limitation of priesthood to men in the Roman Catholic Church is such a deeply ingrained thing, it would be very, very hard for a single Pope to change it, especially early on in his papacy. If one wanted to, one of the first things he'd have to do would be...

...why, it would be to release an encyclical talking about the equality of men and women. Whether that was its core message or not.

reply
Yes, I am aware of that. And I don't know much about the current pope, but he seems progressive and can only go step by step, like Franziskus.

What I do know is, that a main motivation to introduce the celibate, was that priests don't inherit church land to their offspring anymore.

In other words, I applaud reforming what is possible, but I would not want that job as hypocrasy seems required. Because on the other hand all this should be gods own unique church and I could not preach that, while knowing about all the well, human compromises so to say.

reply