What do you think?
The Hidden History Women's Ordination: Female Clergy in the Medieval West
The Roman Catholic leadership still refuses to ordain women officially or even to recognize that women are capable of ordination. But is the widely held assumption that women have always been excluded from such roles historically accurate?
In the early centuries of Christianity, ordination was the process and the ceremony by which one moved to any new ministry (ordo) in the community. By this definition, women were in fact ordained into several ministries. A radical change in the definition of ordination during the eleventh and twelfth centuries not only removed women from the ordained ministry, but also attempted to eradicate any memory of women's ordination in the past. The debate that accompanied this change has left its mark in the literature of the time. However, the triumph of a new definition of ordination as the bestowal of power, particularly the power to confect the Eucharist, so thoroughly dominated western thought and practice by the thirteenth century that the earlier concept of ordination was almost completely erased. The ordination of women, either in the present or in the past, became unthinkable.
References to the ordination of women exist in papal, episcopal and theological documents of the time, and the rites for these ordinations have survived. Yet, many scholars still hold that women, particularly in the western church, were never really ordained. A survey of the literature reveals that most scholars use a definition of ordination that would have been unknown in the early middle ages. Thus, the modern determination that women were never ordained, Macy argues, is a premise based on false terms.
Not a work of advocacy, this important book applies indispensable historical background for the ongoing debate about women's ordination.
In the early centuries of Christianity, ordination was the process and the ceremony by which one moved to any new ministry (ordo) in the community. By this definition, women were in fact ordained into several ministries. A radical change in the definition of ordination during the eleventh and twelfth centuries not only removed women from the ordained ministry, but also attempted to eradicate any memory of women's ordination in the past. The debate that accompanied this change has left its mark in the literature of the time. However, the triumph of a new definition of ordination as the bestowal of power, particularly the power to confect the Eucharist, so thoroughly dominated western thought and practice by the thirteenth century that the earlier concept of ordination was almost completely erased. The ordination of women, either in the present or in the past, became unthinkable.
References to the ordination of women exist in papal, episcopal and theological documents of the time, and the rites for these ordinations have survived. Yet, many scholars still hold that women, particularly in the western church, were never really ordained. A survey of the literature reveals that most scholars use a definition of ordination that would have been unknown in the early middle ages. Thus, the modern determination that women were never ordained, Macy argues, is a premise based on false terms.
Not a work of advocacy, this important book applies indispensable historical background for the ongoing debate about women's ordination.
280 pages, Hardcover
First published October 31, 2007
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
April 1, 2026
An absolutely fascinating book on the history of ordination in the West. It’s not a slam dunk (and it’s not trying to be) for women’s ordination today, but it is helpful, at least, in dispelling the idea of a monolithic & straightforward opposition to the ordination of women throughout all of Christian history. 10/10 recommend even if you’re not interested in the question of women’s ordination but just want to learn more about the history of ordination in general.
May 6, 2018
This is now one of my favorite books of all time.
The books starts off by highlighting an assumption that I never thought of - a lot of arguments about women's ordination assume that "ordination" meant the same thing in the past as it does today. The author then cites a huge amount of evidence to show that, in fact, there was a huge gulf between the first millennium of Christianity and the Western Church since the high middle ages. In the past, ordination referred to elevating individuals to a particular ministry in their particular community - not only were there bishops, priests, and deacons, but also librarians, exorcists, canons, porters, acolytes, readers, abbots, monarchs, etc. More to the point, the leadership of sacraments and worship was far more diffuse - abbesses could hear confession, deaconesses could read the Gospel and preach, presbytera served alongside presbyters at the altar of Mass. The issue of appointing clerics to churches (which eventually became the Investiture Controversy) only came up because in this older idea of ordination, people were ordained to serve special roles in their specific communities/villages/families.
The shift came about in the 11th and 12th centuries, during the Gregorian Reforms. The clergy began to reserve sacred power to themselves and tried to reform the Church by making a purer clergy. They attacked both secular lords (who were often the heads of these community churches and who themselves were considered ordained as monarchs) and women (who were subject to horrible sexism). Women in particular were now denounced as unclean, intellectually and morally inferior, and the source of sin because of Eve. Women were now banned from the altar due to menstruation, could no longer preach or lead or hear confessions because of their inherent inferiority, and were defined as metaphysically incapable of receiving holy orders due to their sex. Touching on holy orders, these were now defined from the previously broad range of ministries back to a new, three-fold understanding of deacon-priest-bishop. Ordination was narrowly redefined to enabling a person to lead Eucharist liturgy, and effecting a metaphysical change in a person that would allow them to exercise this power not only in their community but universally. During this period, women who married clergy were declared concubines and their children bastards, thus enforcing a celibate, monastic clergy on the entire church. Even as the clergy became monasticized, the monks became clericalized as many were ordained as priests (a pathway not open to female monastics).
This is one of the best books that I've ever read. Despite the core of the text being only 130 pages (the rest is documents in the original Latin, notes, etc.), it is full of quotes, references, historical narratives, and other pieces that create a powerful argument. The author continually ties back every piece of evidence to their argument, offers conclusions to the various subsections, and continually reinforces the distinction between ancient and modern understandings of ordination and the distinction between theological and historical perspectives.
The books starts off by highlighting an assumption that I never thought of - a lot of arguments about women's ordination assume that "ordination" meant the same thing in the past as it does today. The author then cites a huge amount of evidence to show that, in fact, there was a huge gulf between the first millennium of Christianity and the Western Church since the high middle ages. In the past, ordination referred to elevating individuals to a particular ministry in their particular community - not only were there bishops, priests, and deacons, but also librarians, exorcists, canons, porters, acolytes, readers, abbots, monarchs, etc. More to the point, the leadership of sacraments and worship was far more diffuse - abbesses could hear confession, deaconesses could read the Gospel and preach, presbytera served alongside presbyters at the altar of Mass. The issue of appointing clerics to churches (which eventually became the Investiture Controversy) only came up because in this older idea of ordination, people were ordained to serve special roles in their specific communities/villages/families.
The shift came about in the 11th and 12th centuries, during the Gregorian Reforms. The clergy began to reserve sacred power to themselves and tried to reform the Church by making a purer clergy. They attacked both secular lords (who were often the heads of these community churches and who themselves were considered ordained as monarchs) and women (who were subject to horrible sexism). Women in particular were now denounced as unclean, intellectually and morally inferior, and the source of sin because of Eve. Women were now banned from the altar due to menstruation, could no longer preach or lead or hear confessions because of their inherent inferiority, and were defined as metaphysically incapable of receiving holy orders due to their sex. Touching on holy orders, these were now defined from the previously broad range of ministries back to a new, three-fold understanding of deacon-priest-bishop. Ordination was narrowly redefined to enabling a person to lead Eucharist liturgy, and effecting a metaphysical change in a person that would allow them to exercise this power not only in their community but universally. During this period, women who married clergy were declared concubines and their children bastards, thus enforcing a celibate, monastic clergy on the entire church. Even as the clergy became monasticized, the monks became clericalized as many were ordained as priests (a pathway not open to female monastics).
This is one of the best books that I've ever read. Despite the core of the text being only 130 pages (the rest is documents in the original Latin, notes, etc.), it is full of quotes, references, historical narratives, and other pieces that create a powerful argument. The author continually ties back every piece of evidence to their argument, offers conclusions to the various subsections, and continually reinforces the distinction between ancient and modern understandings of ordination and the distinction between theological and historical perspectives.
December 27, 2019
S církevní hierarchií to nebylo zřejmě tak jednoduché, jak by se mohlo zdát. Realita raného středověku byla mnohem pestřejší. Jako přelomové období se jeví 11. a 12. století, doba gregoriánské reformy, kdy dochází k zásadní klerikalizaci, hierarchizaci a centralizaci západní církve. Z předchozího období se ale nedochovalo tolik pramenů, často lze praxi vyvozovat ze zákazů. Např. v 9. století nešvar, že abatyše samy "světily" nové klášterní panny, často také zpovídaly nejen spolusestry, ale i muže z okolí. Také zákazy, aby ženy asistovaly u oltáře, někde se to dokonce prý děje se souhlasem místních biskupů.
Do 12. století byl v termínech jako ordinace, konsekrace, benedikce zmatek. Vše se systematizuje až ve vrcholném středověku. Pomocí filosofie se definuje eucharistie a další svátosti. Redifinuje se i pojem kléru a laicity.
V rané církvi existovaly diakonky (asistence při katechezi a křtu žen), do 10. století jsou občas zmiňovány i presbyterky (úkol vyučování) a výjimečně i biskupky. Je ale otázka, zda se nejednalo spíš o manželky církevních služebníků. Pětkrát doložené biskupky (episcopae) se většinou jako manželky biskupů nějak staraly o kostel.
Od 11. století sílí ideál celibátu a prosazuje se Aristotelovo učení, že muž je rozumnější než žena a že sex a ženy jsou něco nečistého. Manželé se stávají věřícími druhé kategorie. Klérus si celibátem vytváří jakoby 3. pohlaví (andělské). Monastizace kléru. Ale v Anglii kněžská manželství ještě ve 13. století. Už v pozdní antice se ale pomalu prosazuje celibát či alespoň cudné manželství u biskupů.
Z kléru vyloučeny ženy a panovníci. Svěcení se nadále vztahuje jen na muže celibátníky. Abatyše pak pouze požehnány (benedikovány), královská korunovace už také nechápána jako svěcení. Staré zmínky o ordinovaných ženách musely být reinterpretovány.
Původně se v církvi ordinovalo k určitému úřadu či úkolu: Diakonka, vrátný, biskup, panna, vdova, presbyter, opat... V 11. století se zrodila hierarchie svěcení (jáhen, kněz, biskup) jako nutný kariérní postup. Najednou se svěcením zavádí nová kasta křesťanů, kteří mají speciální schopnost zpřítomnit Krista.
Rodí se koncept posvátného kněžství, vytváří se kasta kněží, kteří mají jediní pravomoc udělovat svátosti, které se také nově definují. Kněz jako zástupce Krista na zemi, který dokáže proměňovat chléb v tělo Kristovo, které se ve 13. století začíná hojně uctívat ve spojitosti s dogmatem o transsubstanciaci z roku 1215 (nově monstrance, svátek Božího těla). Ještě ve 12. století se objevuje názor, že proměnění závisí na pronesených slovech, ne na osobě. To odmítnuto, jen posvěcené ruce kněze.
Do 12. století byl v termínech jako ordinace, konsekrace, benedikce zmatek. Vše se systematizuje až ve vrcholném středověku. Pomocí filosofie se definuje eucharistie a další svátosti. Redifinuje se i pojem kléru a laicity.
V rané církvi existovaly diakonky (asistence při katechezi a křtu žen), do 10. století jsou občas zmiňovány i presbyterky (úkol vyučování) a výjimečně i biskupky. Je ale otázka, zda se nejednalo spíš o manželky církevních služebníků. Pětkrát doložené biskupky (episcopae) se většinou jako manželky biskupů nějak staraly o kostel.
Od 11. století sílí ideál celibátu a prosazuje se Aristotelovo učení, že muž je rozumnější než žena a že sex a ženy jsou něco nečistého. Manželé se stávají věřícími druhé kategorie. Klérus si celibátem vytváří jakoby 3. pohlaví (andělské). Monastizace kléru. Ale v Anglii kněžská manželství ještě ve 13. století. Už v pozdní antice se ale pomalu prosazuje celibát či alespoň cudné manželství u biskupů.
Z kléru vyloučeny ženy a panovníci. Svěcení se nadále vztahuje jen na muže celibátníky. Abatyše pak pouze požehnány (benedikovány), královská korunovace už také nechápána jako svěcení. Staré zmínky o ordinovaných ženách musely být reinterpretovány.
Původně se v církvi ordinovalo k určitému úřadu či úkolu: Diakonka, vrátný, biskup, panna, vdova, presbyter, opat... V 11. století se zrodila hierarchie svěcení (jáhen, kněz, biskup) jako nutný kariérní postup. Najednou se svěcením zavádí nová kasta křesťanů, kteří mají speciální schopnost zpřítomnit Krista.
Rodí se koncept posvátného kněžství, vytváří se kasta kněží, kteří mají jediní pravomoc udělovat svátosti, které se také nově definují. Kněz jako zástupce Krista na zemi, který dokáže proměňovat chléb v tělo Kristovo, které se ve 13. století začíná hojně uctívat ve spojitosti s dogmatem o transsubstanciaci z roku 1215 (nově monstrance, svátek Božího těla). Ještě ve 12. století se objevuje názor, že proměnění závisí na pronesených slovech, ne na osobě. To odmítnuto, jen posvěcené ruce kněze.
December 1, 2018
"I would also like to infect the uninfected reader with the delightful addiction of scholarship. Come on in, I would like to suggest, the water is fine. And if you aren't yet trained to face the heavy surf of deeper waters, well, there are marvelous discoveries to be made in tide pools as well. The ocean of learning is vast, beautiful, mysterious, and once you put your foot in the water, you may find it hard to resist its charms."
February 18, 2013
I felt like reading some medieval history and this hit the spot. Macy makes a compelling argument that it wasn't merely the involvement of women in ministry that was altered, but also the definition and concept of ordination. Great stuff--Heloise and Abelard charging in with a late defense and a thorough reminder of why I despise Aquinas (I can't believe I'd forgotten) among other things (Brigid was ordained a bishop?!)--and I only wish I had enough Latin to truly enjoy the end notes.
November 6, 2018
Gary Macy points out that women have been ordained to positions such as bishop, priest, and deacon, did in fact lead communion and also orders and abbeys, in the early medieval church. In fact, there is evidence to support that ordination during this time was fairly flexible and widely approved despite how badly it has been forgotten.
What happened? Macy notes that there was a massive shift in understanding gender and ordination in the 11th century where adoption of Roman laws into ecclesial laws and the adoption of Aristotelianism lent itself to an over prioritization of a few texts in the New Testament (like 1 Tim. 2 and 1 Cor. 11) against the trust of the New Testament, and thus to be used to propagate the ideals that women were less in the image of God than men, men were inherently qualified for leadership over women, women were sinful, and marriage was less sacred than celibacy. This created the set of condition where women were defined out of any connection to ordained leadership in the 11th century.
These moves were resisted by thinkers such as Abelard. Macy shows that there was a small but persistent tradition of egalitarian interpreters in medieval times.
This book is quite straightforward as a historical analysis. It does not really have an agenda. But its relevance is clear. Accusations that contemporary feminism has created the longing for women in ministry today neglects that this is not a modern issue. Many Christians for many centuries, quite apart from ideals of liberal progress, have deemed it biblical that women should be ordained. Also, more troubling, as Macy charts, the pervasiveness of the rise of patriarchy due to Aristotelian notions of women being intellectually inferior and the adoption of Roman law that approved of subjugation of women, shows that, ironically, patriarchy is, in this form, a theology that came from an external source. In other words, partriarchy is by most conservatives' definition, an old liberalism.
What happened? Macy notes that there was a massive shift in understanding gender and ordination in the 11th century where adoption of Roman laws into ecclesial laws and the adoption of Aristotelianism lent itself to an over prioritization of a few texts in the New Testament (like 1 Tim. 2 and 1 Cor. 11) against the trust of the New Testament, and thus to be used to propagate the ideals that women were less in the image of God than men, men were inherently qualified for leadership over women, women were sinful, and marriage was less sacred than celibacy. This created the set of condition where women were defined out of any connection to ordained leadership in the 11th century.
These moves were resisted by thinkers such as Abelard. Macy shows that there was a small but persistent tradition of egalitarian interpreters in medieval times.
This book is quite straightforward as a historical analysis. It does not really have an agenda. But its relevance is clear. Accusations that contemporary feminism has created the longing for women in ministry today neglects that this is not a modern issue. Many Christians for many centuries, quite apart from ideals of liberal progress, have deemed it biblical that women should be ordained. Also, more troubling, as Macy charts, the pervasiveness of the rise of patriarchy due to Aristotelian notions of women being intellectually inferior and the adoption of Roman law that approved of subjugation of women, shows that, ironically, patriarchy is, in this form, a theology that came from an external source. In other words, partriarchy is by most conservatives' definition, an old liberalism.
June 18, 2024
This's about women being ordained in the early medieval Church, which was apparently a thing.
The context is, the whole concept of ordination was different then. The concept of the priesthood as a spiritual change in you was a newfangled idea. People were ordained for a specific ministry in a specific place. There're only a few hints that any woman was ordained as priest, specifically - but in the 900's, women being ordained deaconess or abbess (with power to confess and absolve nuns!) or bishop (we have the occasional title; anything else is guesswork?) was the same sort of ordination.
According to this author, this stopped thanks to reformers in the High Middle Ages, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, who promulgated the new idea that priesthood was special above other ministries, that being ordained to the priesthood made an ontological change to your soul, and - apparently - a lot of things about sex differences.
To his credit, Macy explicitly separates history from present-day recommendations, but it's obvious to me that the history he recounts should have implications. Personally, this book made me more confident in my Protestant view of ordination, seeing that the modern Roman Catholic view developed over time and there were other ancient views.
July 20, 2026
Well argued and thoughtful dissection of the early medieval and 11th century texts on women’s ordination in the RC church. I found it easy to read and persuasive, thought at times I feel his arguments may have been more tenuous than signalled.
June 17, 2024
Compelling and convincing.
June 19, 2024
Equal parts fascinating and infuriating.
November 26, 2014
I tend to enjoy Macy because he approaches Church history with a sense that the past is not static, and that how the Church understood a concept or doctrine in one century could be very different from how they understood it in another. Indeed, he's careful to note that oftentimes the same word could have a different meaning depending on the age and the writer.
In this text, Macy tackles the question both of how the Church's understanding of ordination changed over the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries and also how this changing definition gradually wrote women out of a place in the Church. He is the most convincing when he shows how Church reformers of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries gradually excluded women from the diaconate. An even more daring hypothesis is that the wives of priests and bishops were in some sense regarded as being ordained and even that there were incidents of women serving at the altar (although Macy takes care to note that our evidence of women serving at the altar comes largely from those instances when the institutional Church would intervene to halt such practices).
One might quibble on the specifics, but Macy has made a very strong case based on a thorough investigation of the evidence of a Church in which women had a much more prominent role until under the influences of Aristotelian thought, Roman Law, and a monasticization of the Church they were excluded and further that in the nearly eight centuries since this exclusion was complete, the often prominent role of women in the earlier Church was mostly written out of existence.
What impact this has on us today I leave as an exercise for the reader.
In this text, Macy tackles the question both of how the Church's understanding of ordination changed over the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries and also how this changing definition gradually wrote women out of a place in the Church. He is the most convincing when he shows how Church reformers of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries gradually excluded women from the diaconate. An even more daring hypothesis is that the wives of priests and bishops were in some sense regarded as being ordained and even that there were incidents of women serving at the altar (although Macy takes care to note that our evidence of women serving at the altar comes largely from those instances when the institutional Church would intervene to halt such practices).
One might quibble on the specifics, but Macy has made a very strong case based on a thorough investigation of the evidence of a Church in which women had a much more prominent role until under the influences of Aristotelian thought, Roman Law, and a monasticization of the Church they were excluded and further that in the nearly eight centuries since this exclusion was complete, the often prominent role of women in the earlier Church was mostly written out of existence.
What impact this has on us today I leave as an exercise for the reader.
March 12, 2016
I'm not from the Catholic tradition, so this was very informative about what is motivating the failure to ordain women in Rome, since I'm used to being asked for biblical exegesis to defend women's ordination without nearly as much regard for the role of tradition or philosophy. One of the auxiliary arguments the book makes is that the current theological debate surrounding women's ordination in Catholicism is historically irresponsible: that is, asking if women were ever ordained according to the Eucharist-focused, individualistic, "ontological" priesthood that rose in the high middle ages, rather than asking if they were ordained according to contemporary definitions is anachronistic. The book presented the history of women ordained as bishops, deacons, abbesses and preachers in the ancient church, ordination rites discovered for women, and the historical use of the terms presbyterae and episcopae. Twelfth century changes in canon law and the role of the priest, the rebirth of Aristotelian misogyny, and dozens of polemical writings justifying sexism with the use of ancient secular philosophy combined to create an environment in which women's ordained ministry was edged out, denied, and explained away.
June 14, 2013
Това е първата книга, на която давам оценка пълно 5.
Причината е не само (и дори не толкова) в подбора и излаганмето на историческите доказателства, макар че това е направено много добре, а най-вече в тяхната оценка, в критериите за нея и в подчертаването на опасността от анахронизми - в случая да се чете историята през съвременните определения за "ръкополагане" и "свещенство."
Причината е не само (и дори не толкова) в подбора и излаганмето на историческите доказателства, макар че това е направено много добре, а най-вече в тяхната оценка, в критериите за нея и в подчертаването на опасността от анахронизми - в случая да се чете историята през съвременните определения за "ръкополагане" и "свещенство."
October 14, 2014
The book is so extensively documented and footnoted that the text is only 134 pages in length. The writer has a dense style, and is often repititious in his attempts to prove his thesis. Nevertheless, this is a useful book which speaks to the present day situation of the Church.
January 13, 2016
This is an academic read and at times repetitive and dry. However, his thesis is intriguing and worth consideration. I really enjoyed the content, just wish it had been organized in a way that wasn't as repetitive and more accessible to non-academics.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews