Back in high school, my response was obedience with
disagreement.  In all honesty I felt that
for now our culture wasn’t ready for women priests but that eventually when the
time was right.  Other people thought the
time was now, but I disagreed.  It was
far too important to be able to reach everyone and if anyone would look at a
woman priest and not take her seriously, it held far more damage than if she
were President of a company and had someone uncomfortable with her.

I honestly don’t remember when my opinion changed, and at
times I flounder to articulate what I know now. 
What I can say is that my conclusion was based on two premises:  1. Christ knew society wasn’t ready for women
to be religious leaders, but later it would be ok and 2.  to argue that women couldn’t be priests would
necessitate that they lacked somehow in skills and talents needed for the
priesthood.

So often we just get insulted by the Church for her refusal
to ordain women.  Obviously there’s a
shortage of men entering the priesthood, and I know many people with the
impression that women already tend to be ahead of the men spiritually.  I know at my parish, our youth ministry
program is filled predominately with young girls.  At many parishes there are more female altar
servers than altar boys.  More women
volunteer their time in parish ministries than men.   I’ve even been told a number of times that
if I ever want to marry, I have to lower my standards.  I shouldn’t expect to meet a man who will
inspire me in my faith and be a true spiritual leader.  I should simply be satisfied that the man has
an interest in God at all and will go to Mass if I ask him to.  All and all, wouldn’t there be more women
even more qualified to be good priests than men?

As we approach the last week of Lent, I think anyone
confused about the Church’s teaching on this issue should pay close attention
to what happens in the passion accounts.  
Who stayed with Jesus through His suffering and who in that moment of
trial abandoned him?  If we truly belong
to a historically chauvinistic Church, than I ask why do all the gospel
accounts show us that all of Christ’s apostles except for St.
John fled while the women stayed by his side?  We also find that the Resurrection is
discovered by women.  Moreover, how can
we possibly say that our Church is chauvinistic considering the status of our
Blessed Mother Mary, the great amount of canonized women and the fact that we
have women saints that have been declared doctors of the Church?

To think that Jesus was diluting the faith down because
humanity wasn’t ready for female leaders seems completely opposed to how he
conducted the rest of His ministry.  Why
would he have hesitation on giving women such a role?  And if the men were simply trying to
overthrow women from leadership positions in the early Church, why would the
accounts of Christ’s death and resurrection so highlight the women’s
faithfulness and be so honest about the Apostle’s failures?

Obviously, Christ had to see women’s remarkable faith, and
yet he chose men.  Rather than arguing with the Church, we need to see what there is to learn from the Church’s teaching on this and what’s actually behind it rather than what we presume is behind it.

 For a great article on the role of women click here