FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Were women Doctors of the Church before VII?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
This is just a question I have...having women doctors of the Church seems to go against Scripture and I was wondering if women were Doctors of the Church before VII?

A quick check of Wikipedia reveals the following:

"Forty years after her death, she was canonized, in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV. The Cortes exalted her to patroness of Spain in 1617, and the University of Salamanca previously conferred the title Doctor ecclesiae with a diploma. The title is Latin for Doctor of the Church, but is distinct from the papal honor of Doctor of the Church, which is always conferred posthumously and was finally bestowed upon her by Pope Paul VI in 1970 along with Saint Catherine of Siena making them the first women to be awarded the distinction."
I also found this in a book review...

http://tradreviews2.blogspot.com/2007/03...hurch.html

Women Doctors?

Before concluding, it is necessary to take up the question of a female doctor of the Church. By writing of the 33 doctors, Rengers necessarily accepts St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena and St. Therese of Lisieux as doctors of the Church.
The reason there is controversy on this point is because of the scriptural prohibition of St. Paul that "No woman shall teach". This context of the scripture however is in a liturgical and priestly sense. Obviously St. Paul did not intend to say no woman ever shall teach Sunday school classes, or math classes, etc. In 1924 the Theology faculty at the University of Salamanca voted St. Teresa of Avila a doctor of Spain, and asked Pope Pius XI to make her a doctor of the Church. At the same time quarters were asking the Pope to name St. Therese of a doctor of the Church. This was something he chose not to take up because of the vexing question of whether a woman could be a doctor of the Church. This he left for another Pope. Paul VI (of most infelicitous memory) named St. Teresa of Avila and St. Catherine of Siena as doctors of the Church, and in 1997 John Paul II (of highly infelicitous memory) named St. Therese a doctor of the Church. The question was taken up by Paul VI who accepted the decision of theologians who examined the issue and gave him a thumbs up. I am yet to see anywhere published the reasoning behind the go ahead, we know merely that it was done. It may very well be an open question. Rengers steers clear of this question, and accepts the decision of Paul VI and JPII in this regard. I agree with this decision for a few reasons. But the primary reason is that the writings of a Doctor of the Church do not constitute the magisterial authority of the Church. Rather, the propositions of their teaching are adopted as the Church's own teaching. It is unrelated to gender. The doctors do not attain magisterial authority whether it is St. Basil, St. Thomas or St. Catherine, but their writings are utilized by the Church as her teaching, not theirs.

Even if you still have issues regarding the women doctors of the Church, 33 Doctors of the Church remains an excellent resource for teaching, model of life and history, unmuddled with modern misunderstandings. At $1 per saint, it is available from TAN.


St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Therese of Lisieux might have really amounted to something if they'd had penises, huh?


(11-16-2010, 06:34 PM)Revixit Wrote: [ -> ]St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Therese of Lisieux might have really amounted to something if they'd had penises, huh?

If you can't add anything constructive to the discussion then but out.

(11-16-2010, 06:41 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-16-2010, 06:34 PM)Revixit Wrote: [ -> ]St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Therese of Lisieux might have really amounted to something if they'd had penises, huh?

If you can't add anything constructive to the discussion then but out.

You mean "butt out," and I intend to, as butting heads with you is a waste of my time. 

But, this thread was never meant to be a constructive discussion so don't pretend it was.  You started it by asking a question, a question you could have answered yourself with a tiny amount of work.  You really wanted to talk about how, since Vatican II, three women have been named Doctors of the Church.  St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Therese of Lisieux are three of the Church's best-known and best-loved saints, their writings some of the best-loved and most-read as well. Their writings have inspired millions of readers spiritually.  You should read them.
These were women who had visions of Jesus and received instructions from Him about holiness.  I trust you noticed that there was discussion of naming St. Teresa of Avila a Doctor of the Church at least as far back as 1924, long before Vatican II.  It's really rather surprising that she and St. Catherine of Siena were not made Doctors of the Church centuries ago; if they had been male, they certainly would have been.  If you were pope, though, I suppose you'd throw them all out. 

i really don't think there should have been a controversy.

A male who achieved the same things as they did would have received this title too.
How many of the Doctors of the Church were ordained? 
(11-17-2010, 04:37 AM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]How many of the Doctors of the Church were ordained? 

Using the article Peter cited as a reference, I think the answer is 36.
Is this a serious convo?  We should be thankful that these great and holy women were named Doctors of the Church, they deserved it. I don't know why this is turning into a "well it was after Vatican II so it must not be wrong" Don't let your bias of the destructive nature of the spirit of Vat II (and it was destructive) cloud you from the fact that these great saints deserved the title.
Pages: 1 2 3