REDO: Roman Catholic women should be allowed to become priests

Sorry to see my opponent forfeited the last round. With a good reason I think they should have the opportunity in the last round to try and save their case. I will now deconstruct my opponent’s arguments. Rebuttals: Jesus was a man: Pro states that man and women have equal ability in being virtuous and I agree. The problem is that con sees the priesthood as merely a job and not a vocation to which God calls men to. The fact that women can (and often are) just as or more virtuous then men is not a reason to be a priest. As was stated in my arguments in R2 the priesthood is not merely about what one can do as it is about whom one is. Secondly the claim that ethnicity and sex are equal in distinguishing people is none sense. As I showed earlier the Catholic Church expressively teaches that man and women are different on an ontological level (level of being). It's not simply that priests are supposed to have similar DNA to be a sign of Christ but that they distinctively represent the male reality of his personhood. Once again the priesthood isn't about merit, but Gods calling. Breaking Tradition: Let me first respond to the first sentence of this argument. "Tradition should never be a prominent reason to continue something, even in the church." I think my opponent misunderstands what the Catholic Church teaches by tradition. Yes man made tradition (small “t”) is up for debate and personal preference. These include such practices as: facing east for mass, praying the rosary, music and architecture, and liturgical norms. These traditions are expressions of the catholic faith in the world we find ourselves. What we are talking about here is Sacred Tradition (big "T"). These are the traditions passed on by the apostles and are to be held by all the faithful definitively. St. Paul tells us of these traditions in his second letter to the Thessalonians. “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter." [1] The practice of male only ordinations is not a tradition made to help express the faith but rather a Sacred Tradition passed on by the apostles, continued through the ages, and then definitively declared by the Church [2]. Lastly as I pointed out in my explanation on the sacramental nature of ordination, women not being able to be ordained is no greater injustice then wine not being used for baptism. Jesus only called men: This is a very incoherent argument. Frist you say Jesus was culturally limited, so the New Testament was only in the context of the first century (which is partly right). Then you say, “These quotes have been attributed to Jesus, even though it is highly unlikely he said them." Well which one is it? Did he say it and not mean it or did he not say it at all? You cannot put forward both points since one refutes the other. If we do believe he didn’t say it does that mean the bible isn't inspired? Why even advocate for women’s ordination if you deny that we can even be sure that Jesus said anything? It’s a self-refuting argument. I will lastly address the idea that somehow the King of the universe, the "logos", and the word made flesh somehow wanted women to be priests but because of the culture he chose not to. If this is true what else did Jesus want to change but couldn’t? Why even trust the bible at all? Conclusion: In conclusion the Church as perpetuated for 2000 years continues to teach that only made can be made priests. This is not anymore unfair then women having exclusive right to motherhood. Each is an expression of how God uses us for His glory. The points put forward by my opponent are weak and see the priesthood as a job not a vocation. Sources: 1.http://biblehub.com... 2.https://w2.vatican.va...