ANTÁRTIDA

With reference to the female participation in Church governance, this study argues that women as part of the laity in the Catholic Church who have not been given the time and space to realize their full potential in the Church. This study remains incomplete unless the ‘hypocrisy’ and double standard practised by the Catholic Church with regards to the full participation of women in the governance of the Church is examined and discussed. Amazingly, the 21st century Feminist Movements have generated high interest and a considerable sympathy both in and outside the Catholic Church on the very issue and on questions regarding women’s full participation in Church governance.

The place and role of the faithful Catholic women in church governance can no longer go unheard, displaced or be silenced. For this study, concern on women’s place in religious space become a ‘human right’ issue. Especially when women continue to experience discrimination in matters of governance in the Catholic Church, it calls for a rethinking. The Catholic Church cannot continue to be hesitant on the ordination of women. It cannot continue to base its decisions on the 1st century Jewish/Palestinian understanding and treatment of women in the present day 21st century when we all know that traditional culture continues to renew itself as it comes in contact with new reality. The Vatican II Council in Gaudium et Spes (GS) informs this study to a common understanding for the equality of both men and women in the Church’s tradition and practices, while promoting an open culture where all will be comfortable and have a conducive space for cultural experiences. Thus Gaudius et Spes concludes with the following regarding women:

At present women are involved in nearly all spheres of life: they ought to be permitted to play their part fully according to their own particular nature. It is up to everyone to see to it that women’s specific and necessary participation in cultural life be acknowledged and fostered (GS.60).

It is rather interesting to note that the Vatican II used the expression ‘…to be permitted.’ In other words, women are to be permitted by whom? And who gives men permission to fulfil their so-called ‘natural tasks and roles’ in the Catholic Church? This is so because, it seems there is no equality after all. With particular attention on female participation in the ordained

ministry, it is obvious that no equal treatment between men and women when it comes to ordination. However, the official stand of the Catholic Church on the issue at hand is stated on its response to the question who can receive the sacrament of Orders? It is to this effect that the CCC (1577) states:

…only a baptised man validly receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognises herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible (Canon Law 1024; 1Tim 3:1-13).

John Paul II among other pontiffs had a resounding preservation of centralized and hierarchical stand on the ordination of women in the contemporary time while showing which ministries are open to lay people, the Pope stresses the part which women can and must assume in the Church’s mission, and reaffirming that in fidelity to Christ’s will the Church may not allow the promotion of women to the ordained ministry. Therefore, he writes through his apostolic exhortation Christifideles Laici of 1989 (CL.51):

…in speaking about participation in the apostolic mission of the Church, …a woman is called to put to work in this apostolate the “gifts” which are properly hers: first of all, the gift that is her very dignity as a person exercised in word and testimony of life, gifts therefore, connected with her vocation as a woman.

While holding strongly on the view of non-ordained ministry for women, John Paul II conclude as cited by Dupuis and Neuner (2001:759) that, “… in her participation in the life and mission of the Church a woman cannot receive the sacrament of Orders and therefore cannot fulfil the proper function of the ministerial priesthood.” This is a practice that the Church has always found in the expressed will of Christ, totally free and sovereign, who called only men to be his Apostles.

Yet, in another instance John Paul II would finally conclude on the issue of women ordination while stressing the definitive nature of the restriction of priestly ordination to men stating that “I”, he declares that the Church does not possess in any way the faculty (powers) to confer priestly ordination on women. And of course, thought that this statement ought to be considered as definitive by all the faithful of the Catholic Church (Apostolic Letter Ordinatio

By so doing John Paul II brings the argument or discussion to an end and closed; “Rome has spoken, the issue or case is closed” so to say. But is it closed really? The issue of inequality into which women are subordinated cannot be closed at any point in time wherever it may occur, whether within or outside the Church.

In any case, on the issue that Jesus chose only men for the task and function of the ministerial priesthood in the Church would be equal as to accusing Jesus to be “mad” if he were to do otherwise in the 1st century Palestine world. As Uzukwu (1996:141) observes, life in a church developed in a ‘Semitic milieu’ which is noted for looking down upon women. Indeed the place and role of a woman is almost non-existent in the era in question; and for Jesus to have made any attempt to choose a woman would amount to a suicidal approach towards his full mission to be accomplished among nations. Nevertheless, the question that arises is, who are we reading in the Bible? And who (men or women) wrote what we read about women’s place in the priestly ministry of women? The situation in which Jesus lived and worked cannot be under estimated in making a strong case in view. Hence, the ‘contextual understanding’ around the case of Jesus’ non choice of women in his era as Apostles could have been the choice of men writing to soothe their ego in the domination of women.

Moreover, in her submission on women’s ordination or inclusion among the apostles, Rakoczy (2004:202) would argue from the perspective of ‘Apostolic’ qualification or determination as noted in the scriptures. Hence, in support for women’s inclusion by applying the New Testament three criteria she states thus:

I. A person must have accompanied Jesus during his lifetime (Acts 1:21) II. Must have seen the risen Jesus (1Cor.15:3-9) and,

III. A person must have been commissioned by Jesus (Gal 1:11-17).

However, Rakoczy (2004) noted clearly that Mary Magdalene (a woman) fulfils all three conditions and therefore qualifies to be addressed as an apostle;22 _{thereby nullifying the}

argument that no woman was ever chosen as an apostle in the Jesus’ tradition.

22 Mary Magdalene accompanied Jesus during his ministry (Lk. 8:1-3); she saw the risen Lord at the tomb (Jn 20:11-18) and she was also commissioned by Jesus to “go and find my brothers, and tell them: I am ascending to my father and your Father, to my God and your God” (Jn. 20:17-18). Not only Magdalene, other women also accompanied Jesus, were at the tomb, and also communicated the message of resurrection. (See Lk. 23:49, Mt. 28:1-8, Mk. 16:1 and Lk. 24:1-8, Rakoczy, 2004:203-205).

Recalling the aim of the synod Fathers of the 1994 Special Assembly for Africa, this study would agree that a paradigm shift towards the inclusion of women in Church governance has become unavoidable. Women as part of the Church as family as proposed by the synod should be encouraged to take their place and participate meaningfully in the Church governance. While applying the ‘large ear’ listening model for the new all-inclusive and participatory Church, Uzukwu (1996:138) suggests that in traditional and modern Africa, women have generally exercised effective power in a corporate manner. On the issue of individual rights and privileges, Africa has had its share of the oppression of women. In modern times the oppression and subjugation of women may have increased with colonialism but continues with the practice of mainline Christianity which of course remains Western cultural imposition.

In other words, this study submits and suggests that given these clear evidences, no cogent reason should prevent women from being added or given equal chance and space to participate in the governance of the Catholic Church just as their male counterparts. The Christian faith practice is all inclusive and embracing all her children to participate equally whether they are men or women. No one’s gender or sex should exclude them from playing their God given role and task in the governance of the Church. All practice and understanding of exclusion of any gender therefore goes against the equality of all who belong to the Church as family. The application of power to dominate by using male structures in the Catholic Church among the Igbo of South-eastern Nigeria is therefore challenged not only to include women in all ramifications of the Church’s life but also to consider women as active partners in governance. As this study suggests, the model of a listening church already noted above cannot continue indefinitely. The exclusion of women in the Catholic Church governance needs the listening gifts of the Church to help women make a meaningful contribution in the Catholic Church communities in the Igbo society.