|
|---|
|
Translation from the Ante-Nicene Fathers. For a complete electronic copy, visit the Christian Classics Ethereal Library, the New Advent Library. Italics in the text by John Wijngaards.
Since the early Middle Ages, the oldest Latin commentary on the Pauline letters, called “Ambrosiaster, ” a characterization also used for the author of the commentary, was mistakenly attributed to Ambrose, until proven spurious by Erasmus of Rotterdam Throughout the Middle Ages the assumption that Ambrose was the author was so dominant that it silenced all evidence to the contrary.
On 1 Timothy 3,11. “Because the apostle wants only a holy
bishop to be created, as well as a deacon, he does not for that reason want the
people to be different....
Therefore he also wants women who are manifestly
inferior, to be without fault, in order that the Church of God be pure. But the
Cataphrygians, falling into error, contend with vain presumption that, because
the apostle , after addressing deacons, speaks to women, they too can be
ordained as deacons, although they know that the apostles chose seven male
deacons. For was there at the time no single woman fit to be found, since under
the eleven apostles we read that there were holy women?
The heretics
seemingly want to support their intention by the words of the law, rather than
its sense. That is why, through the words of the apostle they try to contradict
the meaning of the apostle. And though he orders the woman to keep silent in
church, they on the contrary try to vindicate the authority of her
ministry.”
On 1 Corinthians 7,10-11. “ ‘A woman may not leave
her husband. If she has left him, she may not remarry.’ This is the
Apostle's advice, that, if she has left her husband because of his bad
behaviour, she remain unmarried. ‘Or she should be reconciled to her
husband.’ In case she cannot contain herself, because she does not
want to fight against the flesh, she should be reconciled to her husband; for
it is not permitted to the woman to marry (again) if she has divorced her
husband because of (his) fornication or apostacy . . . . .
If however the
man has apostacised, or seeks to change the use of his wife, the woman may
neither marry another man or return to him. ‘And the husband should not
divorce his wife.’ Understood however is: except in the case of
fornication. And therefore the Apostle does not add, as in the case of the
woman, that he should remain as he is when he has divorced her. For to a man it
is allowed to take a (new) wife if he has divorced a (previous) wife who sinned
since a man is not restricted by the law as the woman is; for the husband is
the head of his wife.”
On 1 Corinthians 14, 34. “ Women must cover their heads
because they are not the image of God. They must do this as a sign of
their subjection to authority and because sin came into the world through them.
Their heads must be covered in church in order to honor the bishop. In like
manner they have no authority to speak because the bishop is the embodiment of
Christ. They must thus act before the bishop as before Christ, the judge, since
the bishop is the representative of the Lord. Because of original sin they must
show themselves submissive.”
“How can anyone maintain that
woman is the likeness of God when she is demonstrably subject to the dominion
of man and has no kind of authority? For she can neither teach nor be a witness
in a court nor exercise citizenship nor be a judge-then certainly not exercise
dominion.”
“Whatever is true comes from the Holy Spirit, no matter who
expresses this truth.”
Latin: ‘Omne verum, a quocumque dicitur, a
Spiritu Sancto est’ Patres Latini17, 245.
|
|
|---|
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!
